UP 2009 Remedial Law (Evidence) PDF

REVIEWER IN REMEDIAL LAW
Table of Contents
EVIDENCE
343
343
343
343
343
Chapter II: WHICH OF THE FACTS

DO NOT NEED PROOF
A. Judicial Notice
B. Judicial Admissions
344
Chapter III: WHO MUST PROVE

THESE FACTS THAT NEED TO BE
PROVEN?
A. Burden of Proof
B. Presumptions
345
Chapter IV: WHAT DEGREE OF

PROOF IS NEEDED?
A. Weight
and
sufficiency
of
evidence
1. Preponderance of Evidence
(Civil Cases)
2. Proof
Beyond
Reasonable
Doubt (Criminal Cases)
3. Substantial
Evidence
(Administrative Cases)
B. Quantum of Evidence
1. Confessions
2. Circumstantial Evidence
3. Interpretation of Documents
4. Evidence on Motion
347
Chapter V: WHAT AVAILABLE

EVIDENCE IS ADMISSIBLE TO
PROVE THESE FACTS?
A. Testimonial
1. Which witnesses are subject
to objection for competence?
2. Which witnesses will testify
on privileged matters and to
what extent does the privilege
cover?
3. What testimony is subject to a
claim of privilege and by
whom?
4. What evidence is hearsay and
upon what proposition, if it is
hearsay, can it be brought
within any exception?
a. Dying declaration
b. Declaration
against
interest
c. Act or declaration about
pedigree
d. Family
reputation
or
tradition
regarding
pedigree [rule 130, sec.
40]
350
344
344
345
345
347
347
347
347
348
348
348
348
B.
350
350
350
352
352
353
353
353
354
C.
D.
E.
e. Common reputation [rule

130, sec. 41]
f. Part of res gestae [rule
130, sec. 42]
g. Entries in the course of
business [rule 130, sec.
43; rule 8, rules on
electronic evidence (ree)]
h. Entries in official records
i. Commercial list and the
like
j. Learned treatises
k. Testimony or deposition at
a former proceeding
5.
What
testimony
involves
opinions
and
how
can
objections thereto be met? )
6. When is character evidence
admissible?
7. Recalling a witness to the
stand (recalling witnesses
8. Adverse party as witness
(impeachment
of
adverse
partys witness
9. Excluding
witnesses
from
courtroom
(exclusion
and
separation of witnesses
10. May parol evidence be given?
Documentary
1. What
documents
require
authentication and by whom?
a. Public documents [rule
132, sec. 19])
b. Private documents
c. Impeachment of judicial
record
d. Alterations [rule 132, sec.
31]
e. Seal [rule 132, sec. 32]
f. Documents written in an
unofficial language [rule
132, sec. 33]
2. Do documents comply with
best evidence rule? [rule 130,
sec. 3]
a. Best evidence
b. Secondary evidence
Object
Circumstantial evidence
Extrajudicial admissions
1. Self-serving declarations
2. Admission by silence
3. Compromise
4. Res inter alios acta
5. Exceptions to res inter alios
acta
a. Partners/agents
admission; [rule 130,
354
354
354
355
355
355
355
355
356
356
356
357
357
357
357
357
359
359
359
360
360
360
360
360
361
361
361
362
362
362
362
363
Page 341 of 370
EVIDENCE
Chapter I: GENERAL PROVISIONS

A. Definition
B. Scope
C. Admissibility V. Relevancy
D. Competence
Table of Contents
b. Co-conspirators
admission; [rule 130, sec.
30]
363
F. Electronic evidence
1. What evidence is covered by
the ree? (r2,s1; r11, ss1-2,
ree)
2. When and to what extent
admissible? (r3,s2, ree)
3. Evidentiary
weight
of
electronic evidence (r7, ss1-2)
4. The hearsay rule and the
business records exception
(r9, ss1-2)
363
363
Chapter VI: HOW DO I PRESENT

AND OFFER THE EVIDENCE AT
TRIAL?
A. Order of Proof
1. Manner of Examination
2. Mode of Answering
3. Exceptions in General
4. Record of Proceedings
5. Transcript
6. Rights and Obligations
7. Order of Examination
B. Form of Questions
1. Leading
and
Misleading
Questions
C. Offer of Evidence
1. Offer of Evidence
2. When to Make Offer
D. Objections
1. When Repetition of Objection
is Unnecessary
2. Ruling on the Objection
3. Motion to Strike
E. Tender of Excluded Evidence
F. Electronic
Examination
of
Witness
G. Examination of a Child Witness
1. Scope and Applicability
2. Child Witness
3. Exclusion
of
the
Public
During
the
Child's
Examination
4. Alternative Modes of Giving
Testimony
5. When to Take the Child's
Testimony
6. Provisions for Ease of Child in
Testifying
7. Hearsay Exception in Child
Abuse Cases
8. Sexual Abuse Shield Rule
9. Other Protective Measures
366
364
364
365
366
366
366
366
366
366
366
367
367
367
367
367
368
368
368
368
368
EVIDENCE
368
369
369
369
369
369
369
370
370
370
370
370
Page 342 of 370
Chapter I: General Provisions
Evidence
FACULTY-STUDENT EDITORIAL BOARD AND LECTURES COMMITTEE
Prof. Theodore O. Te
FACULTY EDITOR
ACADEMICS COMMITTEE
Samantha Poblacion
DIRECTOR FOR ACADEMICS
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
REMEDIAL LAW
LECTURES
Bryan San Juan
Edel Cruz
SUBJECT EDITOR
HEAD
EVIDENCE
-------Kae Guerrero
Glaisa Po
PRINTING AND DISTRIBUTION
LEAD WRITER
--------
Rania Joya
Leo Zulueta
DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ACADEMICS

LAYOUT HEAD
Chapter I:
General Provisions
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
DEFINITION
SCOPE
CLASSIFICATION
ADMISSIBILITY V. RELEVANCY
COMPETENCE
A. Definition
The means, sanctioned by these rules,

of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding,
the truth respecting a matter of fact.
[Rule 128, Sec. 1]
B. Scope
General Rule: Rules of evidence shall be

the same in all courts and in all trials
and hearings
Exception: If otherwise provided by:
1) Law;
2) ROC.
C. Admissibility v. Relevancy
(Asked 3x)
ADMISSIBILITY Evidence that is both
relevant and competent. [Rule 128, Sec.
3]
RELEVANCY Evidence has such a
relation to the fact in issue as to induce
belief of its existence or non-existence.
[Rule 128, Sec. 4]
General rule: Evidence on 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) is NOT allowed.
Exception: When it tends in any
reasonable degree to establish the
im/probability of fact in issue.
MATERIALITY Evidence directed to
prove a fact in issue as determined by
the rules of substantive law and
pleading
D. Competence
Evidence not excluded by law or ROC.

Exclusionary rules:
1) Constitutional:
a) Unreasonable
searches
and
seizures;
privacy
of
communication
and
correspondence. [Art. 3, Sec 2 &
3, Consti]
b) Miranda
Rights;
right
to
Counsel, prohibition on torture,
force,
violence,
threat,
intimidation or other means
which vitiate the free will;
prohibition of secret detention
places, solitary, incommunicado.
[Art. 3, Sec. 12, Consti]
c) No person shall be compelled to
be a witness against himself.
[Art. 3, Sec. 17, Consti]
2) Statutory:
a) Lack of documentary stamp tax
to documents required to have
one makes such document
inadmissible as evidence in
court until the requisite stamp/s
shall have been affixed thereto
and cancelled. [Sec. 201, NIRC]
b) Any communication obtained by
a person, not being authorized
by all the parties to any private
communication, by tapping any
wire/cable or using any other
device/arrangement to secretly
overhear/intercept/record such
information by using any device,
shall not be admissible in
evidence in any judicial/quasijudicial/legislative/
administrative
hearing
or
investigation. [Sec. 1 & 4 RA
4200 (Wire-Tapping Act)]
c) Rules on Electronic Evidence
[Rule 9, Sec. 1]
Page 343 of 370
EVIDENCE
LOGO, COVER AND TEMPLATE DESIGN
Chapter II:
Which of the Facts
Do Not Need Proof
Chapter II: Which of the Facts Do Not Need Proof
WHEN DISCRETIONARY [Rule 129, Sec.

2]
1) Matters of public knowledge;
2) Matters capable of unquestionable
demonstration;
3) Matters which ought to be known to
judges because of their judicial
functions.
WHEN HEARING IS NECESSARY [Rule

129, Sec. 3]
1) During the trial: The court may
announce its intention to take
judicial notice of any matter and
allow the parties to be heard thereon
on its own initiative or on request of
a party.
2) After the trial and before judgment or
on appeal: The court may announce
its intention to take judicial notice of
any matter that is decisive of a
material issue in the case and allow
the parties to be heard thereon on
its own initiative or on request of a
party.
A. JUDICIAL NOTICE
B. JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS
A. Judicial Notice
(Asked 2x)
WHEN MANDATORY [Rule 129, Sec. 1]

1) Existence and territorial extent of
states;
2) Their political history;
3) Their forms of government;
4) Their symbols of nationality;
5) The law of nations;
6) Admiralty and maritime courts of
the world and their seals;
7) Political constitution and history of
the Philippines;
8) Official acts of the legislative,
executive and judicial departments
of the Philippines
General rule: Courts are not mandated

to take judicial notice of municipal
ordinances. [City of Manila v. Garcia
(1967)]
Exception: If the charter of the
concerned city provides for such judicial
notice.
General rule: Courts cannot take
judicial notice of the contents/records
of other cases even if both cases may
have been tried or are pending before
the same judge. [Prieto v. Arroyo (1965)]
Exception: The case clearly referred to
or the original or part of the records of
the case are actually withdrawn from
the archives of that case and admitted
as part of the record of the case pending
when: [Tabuena v. CA (1991)]
a) There is no objection from adverse
party even with his knowledge
thereof;
b) It is at the request or with the
consent of the parties.
B. Judicial Admissions
Admissions, verbal or written, made by

the party in the course of the
proceedings in the same case. It
requires no proof. [Rule 129, Sec. 4]
Judicial admission may be contradicted
only by showing that:
It was made through palpable mistake;
No such admission was made.
An original complaint, after being
amended, loses its character as a
judicial admission, which would have
required no proof. It becomes merely an
extra-judicial admission requiring a
formal offer in order to be admissible.
[Torres v. CA (1984)]
An admission which constitutes a
deliberate, clear and unequivocal
statement; made as it was in the course
of judicial proceedings, qualifies as a
judicial admission.
A party who judicially admits a fact
cannot later challenge that fact as
judicial admissions are a waiver of
proof; production of evidence is
dispensed with. [Alfelor v. Halasan
(2006]
9) Laws of nature;
10) Measure of time;
11) Geographical divisions.
Page 344 of 370
EVIDENCE
Courts cannot take judicial notice of

foreign laws. [Yao-Kee v. Sy-Gonzales
(1988)
Chapter III: Who Must Prove These Facts That Need to Be Proven?
Chapter III:
Who Must Prove These Facts
That Need to Be Proven?
A. BURDEN OF PROOF
B. PRESUMPTIONS
A. Burden of Proof
Duty of a party to present evidence on

the facts in issue necessary to establish
his claim/defense by the amount
required by law. [Rule 131, Sec. 1]
The test for determining where the
burden of proof lies is to ask which
party to an action/suit will fail if he
offers no evidence competent to show
the facts averred as the basis for the
relief he seeks to obtain, and based
on the result of an inquiry, which party
would be successful if he offers no
evidence. [Republic v. Vda. De Neri
(2004)]
B. Presumptions
CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTIONS [Rule

131, Sec. 2]
1) Whenever a party by his own
declaration/act/omission,
has
led
another to believe a particular thing
to be true and act upon such belief,
he cannot in any litigation arising out of
such
declaration/act/omission
be
permitted to falsify it.
2) The tenant is not permitted to deny
the title of his landlord at the time of
DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTIONS [Rule

131, Sec. 3]
1)
Person is innocent of a crime or
wrong;
2)
Unlawful act is done with an
unlawful intent;
3)
Person
intends
the
ordinary
consequences of his voluntary act;
4)
Person takes ordinary care of his
concerns;
5)
Evidence willfully suppressed would
be adverse if produced;
6)
Money paid by one to another was
due to the latter;
7)
Thing delivered by one to another
belonged to the latter;
8)
Obligation delivered up to the debtor
has been paid;
9)
Prior rents or installments had been
paid when a receipt for the later ones
is produced;
10) A person found in possession of a
thing taken in the doing of a recent
wrongful act is the taker and doer of
the whole act; otherwise, that things
which a person possesses or exercises
acts of ownership over, are owned by
him;
11) Person in possession of an order on
himself for the payment of the money
or the delivery of anything has paid
the money or delivered the thing
accordingly;
12) Person acting in public office was
regularly appointed or elected to it;
13) Official duty has been regularly
performed;
14) A court or judge acting as such,
whether
in the
Philippines
or
elsewhere, was acting in the lawful
exercise of jurisdiction;
15) All the matters within an issue
raised in a case were laid before the
court and passed upon by it; all
matters within an issue raised in a
dispute submitted for arbitration
were laid before arbitrators and
passed upon by them;
16) Private transactions have been fair
and regular;
17) Ordinary course of business has
been followed;
18) There was a sufficient consideration
for a contract;
19) Negotiable instrument was given or
indorsed
for
a
sufficient
consideration;
Page 345 of 370
EVIDENCE
General rule: All facts in issue and

relevant facts must be proven by
evidence.
Exception: [Republic v. Vda. De Neri
(2004)]
1) Allegations
contained
in
the
complaint/answer immaterial to the
issues;
2) Facts which are admitted or which
are not denied in the answer,
provided they have been sufficiently
alleged;
3) Those which are the subject of an
agreed statement of facts between
the parties, as well as those
admitted by the party in the course
of the proceedings in the same case;
4) Facts which are the subject of
judicial notice;
5) Facts which are legally presumed;
6) Facts
peculiarly
within
the
knowledge of the opposite party.
the commencement of the relation of

landlord and tenant between them.
20)
21)
22)
23)
24)
25)
26)
27)
28)
An
indorsement
of
negotiable
instrument was made before the
instrument was overdue and at the
place where the instrument is dated;
A writing is truly dated;
Letter duly directed and mailed was
received in the regular course of the
mail;
Presumptions concerning absence:
Acquiescence resulted from a belief
that the thing acquiesced in was
conformable to the law/fact;
Things have happened according to
the ordinary course of nature and
ordinary nature habits of life;
Persons acting as copartners have
entered into a contract of copartnership;
A man and woman deporting
themselves as husband and wife
have entered into a lawful contract of
marriage;
Presumptions governing children of
women who contracted another
marriage within 300 days after
termination of her former marriage (in
the absence of proof to the contrary):
When Child was Born

Before 180 days after
the solemnization of
the
subsequent
marriage
After
180
days
following
the
celebration
of
the
subsequent marriage
30)
31)
32)
33)
Presumption
Considered to have
been conceived during
the former marriage,
provided it be born
within 300 days after
the termination of the
former marriage
Considered to have
been conceived during
the
subsequent
marriage, even though
it be born within the
300 days after the
termination
of
the
former marriage.
34)
the title of such person or his

successor in interest;
Presumptions regarding survivorship:
(Applicable for all purposes except
succession)
When 2 persons perish in the same calamity,

and it is not shown who died first,
and there are no particular circumstances
from which it can be inferred,
the survivorship is determined from the
probabilities resulting from the strength and
the age of the sexes:
Situation
Person presumed
to have survived
Both < 15 y/o
The older
Both > 60 y/o
The younger
One < 15 y/o,
The one <15
the other > 60 y/o
Both > 15 and < 60 y/o,
The male
of different sexes
Both > 15 and <60 y/o,
The older
of the same sex
One < 15 or > 60 y/o, and The one between
the other between those those ages
ages
35) As between 2 or more persons called to

succeed each other: If there is a doubt
as to which of them died first,
whoever alleges the death of one
prior to the other, shall prove the
same. In the absence of proof, they
shall be considered to have died at the
same time.
EVIDENCE
29)
Chapter III: Who Must Prove These Facts That Need to Be Proven?
A thing once proved to exist

continues as long as is usual with
things of the nature;
The law has been obeyed;
A printed/published book, purporting
to be printed/published by public
authority, was so printed/published;
A printed/published book, purporting
to contain reports of cases adjudged
in tribunals of the country where the
book is published, contains correct
reports of such cases;
A trustee or other person whose duty
it was to convey real property to a
particular person has actually
conveyed it to him when such
presumption is necessary to perfect
Page 346 of 370
Chapter IV: What Degree of Proof Is Needed?
A. WEIGHT
AND
SUFFICIENCY
OF
EVIDENCE
1. PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE
(CIVIL CASES)
2. PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT
(CRIMINAL CASES)
3. SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
(ADMINISTRATIVE CASES)
B. QUANTUM OF EVIDENCE
1. CONFESSIONS
2. CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
3. INTERPRETATION OF DOCUMENTS
4. EVIDENCE ON MOTION
General rule: Findings of the judge who

tried the case and heard the witnesses
are not to be disturbed on appeal,
unless there are substantial facts and
circumstances
which
have
been
overlooked and which, if properly
considered, might affect the result.
[People v. Cabrera (1990)]
Exception: The rule does not apply

when the issue revolved on the
identification
of
the
accused
or
credibility of witness and one judge
heard the testimony and a different
judge penned the decision. [People v.
Escalante (1984); People v. CA (2000)]
A. Weight
and
Evidence
Rationale: The latter judge is not in a

better position than the appellate courts
to make the determination.
The number of witnesses should not in

and by itself determine the weight of
evidence. However, the numerical factor
may be considered in case of conflicting
testimonies. [Caluna v. Vicente (1951)]
Inconsistencies/contradictions
on
details do not materially impair the
credibility of such witness, but on the
contrary are indications of veracity
rather than prevarication. [People v.
Vinas (1968)]
The doctrine of falsus in uno, falsus in
omnibus is not absolute. The court may
accept or reject portions of the witness
testimony depending on the inherent
credibility thereof or the corroborative
evidence in the case. [People v. Baao
(1986)]
Insofar as the civil aspect of the case is
concerned, the prosecution or the
private complainant is burdened to
adduce preponderance of evidence or
superior weight of evidence.
Although the evidence adduced by the
plaintiff is stronger than that presented
by the defendant, he is not entitled to a
judgment if his evidence is not sufficient
to sustain his cause of action.
The plaintiff must rely on the strength
of his own evidence and not upon the
weakness of that of the defendants.
[Quinto v. Andres (2005)]
Sufficiency
of
1. PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE (CIVIL

CASES) [Rule 133, Sec. 1]
The evidence adduced by one side
is, as a whole, superior to or has
greater weight than that of the
other.
Where the evidence presented by
one side is insufficient to ascertain
the claim, there is no preponderance
of evidence. [Habagat Grill v. DMC
Urban (2005)]
In determining preponderance, the

court may consider:
1) All the facts and circumstances of
the case;
2) The witnesses manner of testifying;
3) Their intelligence;
4) Their means and opportunity of
knowing the facts to which they
testify;
5) The
im/probability
of
their
testimony;
6) Their interest or want of interest;
7) Personal credibility so far as the
same may legitimately appear upon
the trial;
8) Number of witnesses (although
preponderance is not necessarily
equated with the number of
witnesses).
2. PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT

(CRIMINAL CASES) [Rule 133, Sec. 2]
That degree of proof which produces
conviction in an unprejudiced mind.
It does not mean such a degree of proof
as, excluding the possibility of error,
produces absolute certainty.
Only moral certainty is required
that degree of proof which produces
conviction in an unprejudiced mind.
3. SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
(ADMINISTRATIVE CASES) [Rule 133,
Sec. 5]
The amount of relevant evidence which
a reasonable mind might accept as
adequate to support a conclusion.
Page 347 of 370
EVIDENCE
Chapter IV:
What Degree of Proof Is Needed?
B. Quantum of Evidence
1. CONFESSIONS [Rule 130, Sec. 33; Rule
115 (e); Art. 3, Sec. 17, Consti]
A categorical acknowledgment of guilt
made by an accused in a criminal case
without any exculpatory statement or
explanation.
If the accused admits having committed
the act in question but alleges a
justification therefore, the same is
merely an admission. [US v. Tolosa]
The operative act in determining
whether
the
right
against
selfincrimination has been violated is when
the police investigation is:
no longer a general inquiry into

an unsolved crime
but has begun to focus on a
particular suspect who has been
taken into custody by the police
to
carry
out
a
process
of
interrogation that lends itself to
eliciting incriminatory statements
and not the signing by the suspect
of
his
supposed
extrajudicial
confession. [People v. Compil (1995)]
Any confession, including a reenactment without admonition of the
right to silence and to counsel, and
without counsel chosen by the accused
is inadmissible in evidence. [People v.
Yip Wai Ming (1996)]
2. CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE [Rule 133,

Sec. 4]
Requisites for circumstantial evidence

to be sufficient for conviction:
1) There is more than 1 circumstance;
2) The facts from which the inferences
are derived are proven;
3) The
combination
of
all
the
circumstances is such as to produce
a conviction beyond reasonable
doubt.
Under the RPC, one cannot be convicted
of treason by means of circumstantial
evidence. [Art. 114, RPC]
3. INTERPRETATION
OF
DOCUMENTS
[Rule 130]
Interpretation of a writing according to
the legal meaning it bears in the
place of execution, unless parties
intended otherwise.
Instrument construed so as to give
effect to all provisions.
Parties intention is to be pursued in
construction of instrument.
In
the
inconsistency
between
general and particular provision, the
latter prevails.
Particular intent controls general
one inconsistent with it.
The circumstances under which an
instrument was made, including the
situation of the subject thereof and of
the parties to it, may be shown, so that
the judge may be placed in the position
of those whose language he is to
interpret.
The terms of a writing are presumed to
have been used in their primary and
general acceptation, but evidence is
admissible to show that they have a
local/technical/peculiar signification
and were so used and understood in the
particular instance, in which case the
agreement
must
be
construed
accordingly.
When there is inconsistency between
written words and printed words, the
former controls over the latter.
Experts and interpreters to be used in
explaining writings that are difficult to
be deciphered, or where the language is
not understood by the court.
When the terms of an agreement have
been intended in a different sense by
the different parties to it, that sense is
to prevail against either party in which
he supposed the other understood it.
And when different constructions of
a provision are otherwise equally
proper, that is to be taken which is
the most favorable to the party in
whose favor the provision is made.
Construction in favor of natural right.
Interpretation according to usage to
determine instruments true character.
4. EVIDENCE ON MOTION [Rule 133, Sec. 7]
The Court may hear the matter on
affidavits or depositions presented by
the respective parties
but the court may direct that the matter
be heard wholly or partly on oral
testimony or depositions.
Page 348 of 370
EVIDENCE
EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSIONS [Rule 133,

Sec. 3]
General
rule:
An
extra-judicial
confession made by an accused, is not a
sufficient ground for conviction.
Exception: When corroborated by
evidence of the actual commission of a
particular crime (corpus delicti).
Chapter IV: What Degree of Proof Is Needed?
Chapter V: What Available Evidence Is Admissible to Prove These Facts?
Chapter V:
What Available Evidence Is
Admissible to Prove These Facts?
F.
A. Testimonial
1. WHICH WITNESSES ARE SUBJECT TO
OBJECTION FOR COMPETENCE?
All persons who can perceive, and,
perceiving, can make their known
perception to others, may be witnesses.
Religious/political belief, interest in the
outcome of the case, or conviction of a
crime unless otherwise provided by law,
shall not be ground for disqualification.
[Rule 130, Sec. 20]
2. WHICH WITNESSES WILL TESTIFY ON
PRIVILEGED MATTERS AND TO WHAT
EXTENT DOES THE PRIVILEGE COVER?
(Asked 5x)
a. Disqualification by reason of mental
incapacity or immaturity [Rule 130, Sec.
21]
A mental retardate is not for this reason
alone disqualified from being a witness.
[People v. Salomon (1993)]
Every child is presumed qualified to be
a witness.
However, the court shall conduct a
competency examination of a child,
motu propio or on motion of a party,
when it finds that substantial doubt
exists regarding the ability of the child
to perceive, remember, communicate,
distinguish truth from falsehood, or
appreciate the duty to tell the truth in
court. [Sec. 6, AM 00-4-07-SC (Child
Witness Rule)]
Page 349 of 370
EVIDENCE
A. TESTIMONIAL
1. WHICH WITNESSES ARE SUBJECT TO
OBJECTION FOR COMPETENCE?
2. WHICH WITNESSES WILL TESTIFY ON
PRIVILEGED MATTERS AND TO WHAT
EXTENT
DOES
THE
PRIVILEGE
COVER?
3. WHAT TESTIMONY IS SUBJECT TO A
CLAIM OF PRIVILEGE AND BY WHOM?
4. WHAT EVIDENCE IS HEARSAY AND
UPON WHAT PROPOSITION, IF IT IS
HEARSAY, CAN IT BE BROUGHT
WITHIN ANY EXCEPTION?
5. WHAT
TESTIMONY
INVOLVES
OPINIONS
AND
HOW
CAN
OBJECTIONS THERETO BE MET? )
A. DYING DECLARATION
B. DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST
C. ACT OR DECLARATION ABOUT
PEDIGREE
D. FAMILY
REPUTATION
OR
TRADITION
REGARDING
PEDIGREE [RULE 130, SEC. 40]
E. COMMON REPUTATION [RULE 130,
SEC. 41]
F. PART OF RES GESTAE [RULE 130,
SEC. 42]
G. ENTRIES IN THE COURSE OF
BUSINESS [RULE 130, SEC. 43;
RULE 8, RULES ON ELECTRONIC
EVIDENCE (REE)]
H. ENTRIES IN OFFICIAL RECORDS
I. COMMERCIAL LIST AND THE LIKE
J. LEARNED TREATISES
K. TESTIMONY OR DEPOSITION AT A
FORMER PROCEEDING
6. WHEN IS CHARACTER EVIDENCE
ADMISSIBLE?
7. RECALLING A WITNESS TO THE STAND
(RECALLING WITNESSES
8. ADVERSE
PARTY
AS
WITNESS
(IMPEACHMENT OF ADVERSE PARTYS
WITNESS
9. EXCLUDING
WITNESSES
FROM
COURTROOM
(EXCLUSION
AND
SEPARATION OF WITNESSES
10. MAY PAROL EVIDENCE BE GIVEN?
B. DOCUMENTARY
1. WHAT
DOCUMENTS
REQUIRE
AUTHENTICATION AND BY WHOM?
A. PUBLIC DOCUMENTS [RULE 132,
SEC. 19])
B. PRIVATE DOCUMENTS
C. IMPEACHMENT OF JUDICIAL
RECORD
D. ALTERATIONS [RULE 132, SEC. 31]
E. SEAL [RULE 132, SEC. 32]
F. DOCUMENTS WRITTEN IN AN
UNOFFICIAL LANGUAGE [RULE
132, SEC. 33]
2. DO DOCUMENTS COMPLY WITH BEST
EVIDENCE RULE? [RULE 130, SEC. 3]
C.
D.
E.
A. BEST EVIDENCE
B. SECONDARY EVIDENCE
OBJECT
CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
EXTRAJUDICIAL ADMISSIONS
1. ADMISSION BY SILENCE
2. COMPROMISE
3. RES INTER ALIOS ACTA
4. EXCEPTIONS TO RES INTER ALIOS
ACTA
A. PARTNERS/AGENTS ADMISSION;
[RULE 130,
B. CO-CONSPIRATORS ADMISSION;
[RULE 130, SEC. 30]
ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE
1. WHAT EVIDENCE IS COVERED BY THE
REE? (R2,S1; R11, SS1-2, REE)
2. WHEN AND TO WHAT EXTENT
ADMISSIBLE? (R3,S2, REE)
3. EVIDENTIARY WEIGHT OF
ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE (R7, SS1-2)
4. THE HEARSAY RULE AND THE
BUSINESS RECORDS EXCEPTION (R9,
SS1-2)
Requisites of competency of a child as

witness: [People vs. Mendoza (1996)]
1) Capacity of observation;
2) Capacity of recollection;
3) Capacity of communication.
b. Disqualification by reason of marriage

[Rule 130, Sec. 22]
General rule: During their marriage,
neither the husband nor the wife may
testify for or against the other without
the consent of the affected spouse.
Exception:
a) In a civil case by one against the
other;
b) In a criminal case for a crime
committed by one against the other
or
the
latter's
direct
descendants/ascendants.
Purpose: Privilege to prevent testimony
by other spouse based on an aversion to
use judicial compulsion in a litigation to
place spouses in an opposing posture
that may weaken or destroy their
marriage. [People v. Francisco]
This privilege is also given to a spouse
to prevent the other from testifying in
his favor. [People v. Franciso]
d. Disqualification by reason of privileged

communication
1) Marital privilege; [Rule 130, Sec.
24(a)]
Purpose: Privilege for confidential
communications justified on the
ground that it promotes marital
harmony.
General rule: Husband or the wife,
during or after the marriage, cannot
be examined without the consent of
the other as to any communication
received in confidence by one from
the other during the marriage
Exception:
a) In a civil case by one against the
other;
b) In a criminal case for a crime
committed by one against the
other or the latter's direct
descendants/ascendants.
A widow of a victim allegedly
murdered may testify as to her
husbands dying declaration as to
how he died the since the same was
not intended to be confidential. [US
v. Antipolo]
Marital disqualification
[Rule 130, Sec. 22]
Broader since it prevents
all
adverse
testimony
between spouses and not
merely
disclosure
of
confidential
communications and may
even
cover
matters
occurring prior to the
marriage
One spouse should be a
party to the case
Marital privilege [Rule

130, Sec. 24]
Limited to those made
during the course of
the marriage
Where neither spouse

is a party, this is the
disqualifying rule
Page 350 of 370
EVIDENCE
c. Disqualification by reason of death or

insanity of adverse party [Rule 130, Sec.
23]
Dead Mans Statute or Survivorship
Rule
General rule:
a. Parties or assignors of parties to a
case, or persons
b. in whose behalf
a
case is
prosecuted,
c. against an executor/administrator
or other representative of a deceased
person, or against a person of
unsound mind,
d. upon a claim/demand against the
estate of such deceased person or
against such person of unsound
mind,
e. cannot testify as to any matter of
fact
f. occurring before the death of such
deceased person or before such
person became of unsound mind.
Exception:
The survivor may testify against the
estate of the deceased where the
latter was guilty of fraud which
fraud was established by evidence
other than the testimony of the
survivor. [Ong Chua v. Carr]
He may also testify where he was

the one sued by the decedents
estate since the action then is not
against the estate. [Tongco v.
Vianzon]
He may likewise testify where the
estate had filed a counterclaim
against him or where the estate
cross-examined him as to matters
occurring during the lifetime of the
deceased. [Goi v. CA]
Purpose:
To
guard
against
the
temptation to give false testimony on
the part of the surviving party and to
put the parties to the suit upon terms of
equality in regard to opportunity to
produce evidence.
2) Attorney-client privilege; [Rule 130,

Sec. 24(b)]
General rule: The attorney-client
privilege may not be invoked to
refuse to divulge the identity of the
client.
Exception:
[Regala
v.
Sandiganbayan (1996)]
a) When a strong probability exists
that revealing the name would
implicate that person in the very
same activity for which he
sought the lawyers advice;
b) When disclosure would open the
client to liability;
c) When the name would furnish
the only link that would form the
chain of testimony necessary to
convict.
3) Physician-patient privilege; [Rule
130, Sec. 24(c)]
Covers any advice or treatment
given by a physician or any
information which he may have
acquired in attending such patient
in a professional capacity, which
information was necessary to enable
him to act in capacity, and which
would blacken the reputation of the
patient.
The privilege belongs to the patient,
not the physician so that the latter
cannot claim it if the patient
abandons it. [Bautista]
This does not apply when the doctor
is presented as an expert witness
and only hypothetical problems were
presented to him. [Lim v. CA (1992)]
5) Public officer privilege; [Rule 130,

Sec. 24(e)]
A public officer cannot be examined
during his term of office or
afterwards,
as to communications made to him
in official confidence,
when the court finds that the public
interest would suffer by the
disclosure.
Parental and filial privilege. [Rule 130,

Sec. 25]
A person cannot be compelled to
testify against his parents, other
direct ascendants, children or other
direct descendants.
4. WHAT EVIDENCE IS HEARSAY AND

UPON WHAT PROPOSITION, IF IT IS
HEARSAY, CAN IT BE BROUGHT
WITHIN ANY EXCEPTION? (R130,
SS36-47) (Asked 2x)
HEARSAY - Any evidence the probative

value of which is not based on the
personal knowledge of the witness but
on the knowledge of some other person
not on the witness stand.
Rationale: The party against whom
such hearsay evidence is presented is
deprived of his right and opportunity to
cross-examine the persons to whom the
statements or writings are attributed.
General rule: A witness can testify only
as to those facts which he knows of his
personal knowledge.
PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE Those
derived from his own perception.
Witnesses can testify only with regard
to facts of which they have personal
knowledge.
The testimony of a witness regarding a
statement made by another person, if
intended to establish the truth of the
facts asserted in the statement is
clearly hearsay evidence.
It is otherwise if the purpose is merely
to establish the fact that the
statement was made, or the tenor of
such statement.
[People v. Cusi
(1965)]
The testimony of a witness on the
confession made to him by the
accused is not hearsay.
He is testifying to a fact which he
knows of his personal knowledge (was
testifying to the fact that the accused
told him that he stabbed the victim)
and not to the truth of the statement
of the accused.
[People v. Gaddi
(1989)]
Newspaper
clippings
or
facts
published in the newspapers are
hearsay and have no evidentiary value
unless substantiated by persons with
personal knowledge of said facts.
[People v. Aguel (1980)]
Page 351 of 370
EVIDENCE
4) Priest-penitent privilege; [Rule 130,

Sec. 24(d)]
Covers any confession made to or
any advice given by a priest or
minister
in his professional character
in the course of discipline enjoined
by the church to which he belongs.
3. WHAT TESTIMONY IS SUBJECT TO A

CLAIM OF PRIVILEGE AND BY WHOM?
(R130, s25)
Doctrine of Independently Relevant

Statements
Statements or writings attributed to a
person who is not on the witness stand
are being offered NOT to prove the truth
of the facts stated therein but only to
prove that such were actually made.
It is not covered by the hearsay rule.
[People v. Cusi] (1965)
Independent of WON the facts stated
are true, they are relevant since they
are the facts in issue or are
circumstantial evidence of the facts in
issue.
WON the statement made is true is
immaterial. What is sought to be proved
is the fact that such statement was
made.
Exceptions: (Asked 7x)
a. Dying Declaration [Rule 130, Sec. 37]

Antemortem statement or
statement in articulo mortis.
However, the law does not require

the declarant to state explicitly a
perception of the inevitability of
death.
The foreboding may be gleaned from
surrounding circumstances, such as
the nature of the declarants injury
and conduct that would justify a
conclusion
that
there
was
consciousness of impending death.
[People v. Latayada (2004)]
The intervening time from the
making of the declaration up to the
actual death of the declarant is
immaterial
as
long
as
the
declaration was made under the
consciousness of an impending
death. [US v. Mallari]
c. Act or declaration about pedigree [Rule

130, Sec. 39]
Relationship,
family
genealogy,
birth, marriage, death, the dates
when and the places where these
fast occurred, and the names of the
relatives.
It also embraces facts of family
history intimately connected with
pedigree.
The rules do not require any specific
degree of relationship but the weight
to which such act/declaration is
entitled may be affected by the
degree of relationship.
The requirement that there be other
proof than the declarations of the
declarant as to the relationship does
not apply where it is sought to reach
the estate of the declarant himself
and not merely to establish a right
through his declarations to the
property or some member of the
family. [Tison v. CA]
Requisites for admissibility:

[Mendoza v. CA (1991)]
1) The declarant is dead or unable
to testify.
2) The pedigree must be in issue.
3) The declarant must be a relative
of the person whose pedigree is
in issue.
4) The declaration must be made
before the controversy arose.
5) The relationship between the
Page 352 of 370
EVIDENCE
Requisites: [People v. Macandog

(2001)]
1) Declaration was made under
the consciousness of an
impending death;
2) Declaration refers to cause
and
surrounding
circumstances
of
such
death;
3) Declaration refers to facts
the person is competent to
testify to;
4) Declaration is offered in any
case wherein his death is
the subject of inquiry.
b. Declaration against interest [Rule 130,

Sec. 38]
Made by a person deceased, or
unable to testify, against the
interest of the declarant.
INABILITY TO TESTIFY The
person
is
dead,
mentally
incapacitated
or
physically
incompetent. Mere absence from
the jurisdiction does not make
him ipso facto unavailable.
[Fuentes vs. CA (1996)]
Subject of declaration/act: The
fact asserted was at the time it was
made
so
far
contrary
to
declarant's own interest that a
reasonable man in his position
would
not
have
made
the
declaration unless he believed it to
be true.
The declaration should be against
himself or his successors in interest
and against 3rd persons.
undivided
reputation
although it need not be
unanimous. It is the definite
opinion of the community in
which the fact to be proved is
known or exists.
CHARACTER The inherent
qualities of a person.
REPUTATION - The opinion
of a person by others.
2) Monuments and inscriptions in
public places as evidence of
common reputation.
declarant and the person whose

pedigree is in question must be
shown by evidence other than
such declaration.
e. Common reputation [Rule 130, Sec. 41]

Admissible evidences under this
exception:
1) Common reputation existing
previous to the controversy,
respecting facts of public or
general interest more than 30
years old, or respecting marriage
or moral character;
COMMON REPUTATION
The general or substantially
f.
Part of res gestae [Rule 130, Sec. 42]

Statements admissible as part of the
res gestae:
1) Statements made by a person
while a starting occurrence is
taking place or immediately prior
or subsequent thereto, with
respect to the circumstances
thereof.
2) Statements accompanying an
equivocal act material to the
issue, and giving it a legal
significance.
A dying declaration can be made
only by the victim after the attack
while a statement as part of the res
gestae may be that of the killer
himself after or during the killing.
[People v. Reyes]
Where the elements of both are
present, the statement may be
admitted both as a dying declaration
and as part of the res gestae. [People
v. Balbas (1983)]
Notes taken regarding a transaction
by a person who is not a party
thereto and who has not been
requested to take down such notes
are not part of the res gestae.
[Borromeo v. CA (1976)]
g. Entries in the course of business [Rule

130, Sec. 43; Rule 8, Rules on Electronic
Evidence (REE)]
The entry must have been made at
or near the time of transactions to
which they refer.
The entry should have been made
by a person deceased, or unable to
testify, who was in a position to
know the facts therein stated.
Such entry is treated as prima facie
evidence, if the person who made
the entries did so in his professional
capacity or in the performance of
duty and in the ordinary or regular
Page 353 of 370
EVIDENCE
d. Family reputation or tradition regarding

pedigree [Rule 130, Sec. 40]
The
exception
refers
to
reputations/traditions existing in a
family previous to the controversy,
in respect to the pedigree of any one
of its members.
It may be received in evidence if the
witness testifying thereon be also a
member of the family, either by
consanguinity or affinity.
Documentary evidence allowed
under the exception: Entries in
family bibles or other family books,
charts, engravings on rings, family
portraits and the like.
This enumeration, by ejusdem
generis, is limited to objects which
are commonly known as "family
possessions," or those articles which
represent, in effect, a family's joint
statement of its belief as to the
pedigree of a person.
These have been described as
objects "openly exhibited and well
known to the family," or those
"which, if preserved in a family, may
be regarded as giving a family
tradition." [Jison v. CA (98)]
A persons statement as to his date
of birth and age, as he learned of
these from his parents or relatives,
is an ante litem motam declaration
of a family tradition. [Gravador v.
Mamigo (1967)]
Such statement (as to his age)
prevails over the mere opinion of
the trial judge. [US v. Agadas (36
PHIL 246)]
However, such statement (as to
age) cannot generally prevail
over the secondary statement of
his father. [US v. Evangelista]
course of business/duty.
If the entrant is available as a
witness, the entries will not be
admitted as an exception to the
hearsay
rule
but
they
may
nevertheless be availed of by said
entrant as a memorandum to
refresh his memory while testifying
on
the
transactions
reflected
therein. [Cang Yui v. Gardner]
i.
Commercial list and the like
j.
Requisites:
b) Such statements are contained
in a list
c) The compilation is published for
use by persons engaged in that
occupation
d) It is generally used and relied
upon by them
Learned treatises
Requisites:
1) on
a
subject
of
history/law/science/art
2) court takes judicial notice of it
k. Testimony or deposition at a former

proceeding
The prior testimony must have been
made by a witness deceased or
unable to testify, in a former
case/proceeding
(judicial
or
administrative) involving the same
parties and subject matter.
UNABLE TO TESTIFY An
inability proceeding from a
grave cause almost amounting
to death as when the witness is
old and has lost the power of
speech. [Tan v. CA (1967)]
The prior testimony may be given in
evidence against the adverse party
who had the opportunity to crossexamine the witness.
Child Rule as a Special Exception
[Sec. 28, AM 00-4-07-SC]
1) Hearsay testimony of a child
describing any act or attempted act
of sexual abuse may now be
admitted in any criminal proceeding
subject to certain prerequisites and
the adverse partys right to crossexamine.
2) The admissibility of such hearsay
statements shall be determined by
the court in light of specified
subjective
and
objective
considerations
which
provide
sufficient indicia or reliability of the
child witness.
5. WHAT
TESTIMONY
INVOLVES
OPINIONS AND HOW CAN OBJECTIONS
THERETO BE MET? (OPINION RULE)
General rule: The opinion of a witness

is not admissible. [Rule 130, Sec. 48]
Exception:
a) Expert witness: On a matter
requiring
special
knowledge/skill/experience/
training which he shown to possess.
[Rule 130, Sec. 49]
There is no precise requirement
as to the mode in which
skill/experience shall have been
acquired.
Page 354 of 370
EVIDENCE
h. Entries in official records

The entries must be made at or near
the time of transactions to which
they refer, and by a person
deceased, or unable to testify, who
was in a position to know the facts
therein stated.
The entrant must have personal
knowledge of the facts stated by him
or such facts acquired by him from
reports made by persons under a
legal duty to submit the same.
[Salmon, Dexter & Co. v. Wijangco]
Such record is prima facie evidence,
if the person made the entries in his
professional capacity or in the
performance of duty and in the
ordinary or regular course of
business or duty
The report submitted by a police
officer in the performance of his
duties on the basis of his own
personal observation of the facts
reported,
may
properly
be
constituted as an exception. [Caltex
v. Africa (1966)]
Entries in a police blotter are not
conclusive proof of the truth of such
entries. [People vs. Cabuang (1993)]
Baptismal certificates or parochial
records of baptism are not official
records. [Fortus v. Novero (1968)]
or
3) a witness expert in the subject
testifies that the writer of the
statement
in
the
treatise/periodical/pamphlet is
recognized
in
his
profession/calling as expert in
the subject.
Scientific study and training are

not always essential to the
competency of a witness as an
expert.
Knowledge acquired by doing is
no less valuable than that
acquired by study. [Dilag Co. v.
Merced (1949)]
Polygraph test has not as yet
attained scientific acceptance as
a reliable and accurate means of
ascertaining truth or deception.
[People vs. Adoviso (1999)]
b) Ordinary witness: If proper basis is
given, and regarding: [Rule 130, Sec.
50]
Identity of a person about whom
he has adequate knowledge;
Handwriting with which he has
sufficient familiarity;
Mental sanity of a person with
whom
he
is
sufficiently
acquainted;
Impressions
of
the
emotion/behavior/condition/ap
pearance of a person.
WHEN IS CHARACTER EVIDENCE
ADMISSIBLE? (CHARACTER [Rule 130,
Sec. 51; Rule 132, Sec. 14])
General rule: Character evidence is not

admissible.
Exception:
1) In criminal cases:
a) Accused May prove his good
moral
character
which
is
pertinent to the moral trait
involved in the offense charged.
b) Prosecution May not prove the
bad moral character of the
accused, except in rebuttal.
c) Offended Party His/her good or
bad moral character may be
proved if it tends to establish in
any reasonable degree the
im/probability of the offense
charged.
2) In civil cases:
Moral character is admissible
only when pertinent to the issue
of character involved in the case.
[Rule 130, Sec. 51]
Evidence of the witness good
character is not admissible until
such
character
has
been
impeached. [Rule 130, Sec. 14]
While evidence of another crime
is, as a rule, not admissible, it is
admissible when it is otherwise
7. RECALLING A WITNESS TO THE STAND

(RECALLING WITNESSES [RULE 132,
SEC. 9])
After both sides have concluded the

examination of a witness, he cannot be
recalled without leave of court.
Examples of grounds for recalling a
witness: [People v. Rivera (1991)]
Particularly identified material points
were not covered in the crossexamination;
Particularly described vital documents
were not presented to the witness;
The cross-examination was conducted
in so inept a manner as to result in a
virtual absence thereof.
8. ADVERSE
PARTY
AS
WITNESS
(IMPEACHMENT OF ADVERSE PARTYS
WITNESS [RULE 132, SEC. 11])
How done:
1) By contradictory evidence;
2) By evidence that his general
reputation for truth, honesty or
integrity is bad;
3) By evidence that he has made at
other times statements inconsistent
with his present testimony.
Evidence of particular wrongful acts is
not allowed except that it may be shown
by the examination of the witness, or
the record of the judgment, that he has
been convicted of an offense.
IMPEACHMENT OF OWN WITNESS
[Rule 132, Sec. 12]
General rule: The party producing a
witness is not allowed to impeach the
latters credibility.
Exception:
1) Unwilling or hostile witness.
Impeachment may be made by
the party presenting the hostile
or unwilling witness in all
respects as if he had been called
by the adverse party, except by
evidence of bad character.
He may also be impeached and
Page 355 of 370
EVIDENCE
6.
relevant, as when it tends to

identify
defendant
as
the
perpetrator and tends to show is
presence at the scene of the
crime or in the vicinity of the
crime at the time charged, or
when it is evidence of a
circumstance connected with the
crime. [People vs. Irang (1937)]
cross-examined by the adverse

party,
but
such
crossexamination must only be on the
subject
matter
of
his
examination-in-chief.
2) Witness is an adverse party or an
officer/director or managing agent of
a public/private corporation or of a
partnership/association which is an
adverse party.
9. EXCLUDING
WITNESSES
COURTROOM
(EXCLUSION
SEPARATION OF WITNESSES
132, SEC. 15])
FROM
AND
[RULE
The judge may exclude from the court

any witness who is not under
examination at that time so that he may
not hear the testimony of other
witnesses.
The judge may also have the witnesses
separated
and
prevented
from
conversing with each other until all
have been examined.
If a witness remains present in the
hearing despite the courts order that all
other witnesses leave the court room,
the discretion to admit/reject the
testimony of such witness will lie within
the courts discretion. [People v. Sandal]
imposed upon by unfair dealing

of the other.
Imperfection
includes
an
inaccurate statement in the
agreement or incompleteness in
the writing or the presence of
inconsistent provisions therein.
b) The failure of the written agreement
to express the true intent and
agreement of the parties thereto;
c) The
validity
of
the
written
agreement;
d) The existence of other terms agreed
to by the parties or their successors
in interest after the execution of the
written agreement.
It does not apply either when 3rd
parties are involved. [Lechugas v. CA
(1986)]
Parol Evidence Rule

Presupposes that the
original document is
available in court
Prohibits the varying of

the terms of a written
agreement
10. MAY PAROL EVIDENCE BE GIVEN?
Applies
only
to
documents contractual
in nature (Exception:
wills)
Can be invoked only
when the controversy
is between the parties
to
the
written
agreement, their privies
or any party directly
affected thereby
Can be invoked by any

party to an action
regardless of WON
such
party
participated in the
writing involved
B. Documentary
1. WHAT
DOCUMENTS
REQUIRE
AUTHENTICATION AND BY WHOM?
a. PUBLIC DOCUMENTS [Rule 132, Sec.
19])
Public documents generally include
notarial documents and
are admissible in evidence without
the necessity of preliminary proof as
to
its
authenticity
and
due
execution. [Antillon v. Barcellon]
1) Written official acts of the
sovereign
authority,
official
Page 356 of 370
EVIDENCE
Any evidence aliunde, whether oral or

written, which is intended or tends to
vary or contradict a complete and
enforceable agreement embodied in a
document.
General rule:
When the terms of an agreement
(including wills) have been reduced
to writing,
it is considered as containing all the
terms agreed upon and there can
be, between the parties and their
successors in interest,
no evidence of such terms other
than the contents of the written
agreement.
Exception: A party may present
evidence to modify, explain or add to
the terms of written agreement if he
puts in issue in his pleading:
a) An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or
imperfection
in
the
written
agreement;
Mistake here refers to a mistake
of fact mutual to the parties or
where the innocent party was
Best Evidence Rule

Contemplates
the
situation wherein the
original writing is not
available and/or there
is a dispute as to
whether said writing is
the original
Prohibits
the
introduction
of
substitutionary
evidence in lieu of the
original
document
regardless of WON it
varies the contents of
the original
Applies to all kinds of
documents
bodies and tribunals, and public

officers,
whether
of
the
Philippines or of a foreign
country.
2) Records of official acts of the
sovereign
authority,
official
bodies and tribunals, and public
officers,
whether
of
the
Philippines or of a foreign
country.
How to prove Public Records (kept in

the
Philippines)
of
Private
Documents required by law to be
entered therein [Rule 132, Sec. 27]
By the original record, or a copy
thereof, attested by the legal
custodian of the record, with an
appropriate certificate that such
officer has the custody.
Such records are evidence, even
against 3rd persons, of the facts
which
gave
rise
to
their
execution and of the date of
execution. [Rule 132, Sec. 23]
Only
baptismal
certificates
issued by the priests during the
Spanish regime are considered
public documents. [Adriano v. De
Jesus]
o While the birth certificate is
primary
evidence
of
a
victims age in a case of
statutory
rape,
in
the
absence of such evidence,
o the victims minority may be
proved
by
other
documentary evidence such
as her baptismal certificate
or other authentic records.
[People v. Llandelar (2001)]
Contents of attestation [Rule 132,

Sec. 25]
The attestation must state that
the copy is a correct copy of the
original or a specific part
thereof, as the case may be.
The attestation must be under
the official seal of the attesting
officer, if there be any, or if he be
the clerk of a court having a
seal, under the seal of such
court.
A mere copy of the foreign public
document,
without
the
attestation and the certificate, is
not admissible in evidence to
prove foreign law. [Wildvalley
Shipping v. CA (2000)]
Irremovability of record [Rule 132,

Sec. 26]
Any public record, an official copy of
which is admissible in evidence,
must not be removed from the office
in which it is kept,
except upon order of a court where
the inspection of the record is
essential to the just determination
of a pending case.
How to prove public records [Rule

132, Sec. 24]
1) By an official publication thereof;
2) By a copy attested by the officer
having the legal custody of the
record, or by his deputy, and
accompanied:
If the record is not kept in the
Philippines, with a certificate
that such officer has the
custody.
If the record is in a foreign
country, the certificate may be
made by a secretary of the
embassy/legation,
consulgeneral, consul, vice-consul,
consular agent or any officer in
the foreign service of the
Philippines stationed in the
foreign country in which the
record
is
kept,
and
authenticated by the seal of his
office.
Translations
of
foreign
judgments must be made by an
official court interpreter of the
Philippines
or
foreign
governments or by a competent
and accurate translator. [Pacific
Asia Shipping v. NLRC, (1988)]
How to prove notarial documents

(except last wills and testaments)
[RULE 132, SEC. 30]
The document may be presented
in evidence without further
proof,
the
certificate
of
acknowledgment being prima
facie evidence of the execution of
the instrument or document
involved.
Such notarized documents are
evidence, even against 3rd
persons, of the facts which gave
rise to their execution and of the
date of execution. [Rule 132, Sec.
23]
Page 357 of 370
EVIDENCE
Probative value [Rule 132, Sec. 23]

Documents consisting of entries in
public
records
made
in
the
performance of duty by a public
officer are prima facie evidence of
the facts therein stated.
Proof of lack of record [Rule 132,
Sec. 28]
A written statement signed by
an officer having the custody of
an official record or by his
deputy
that after diligent search, no
record or entry of a specified
tenor is found to exist in the
records of his office,
accompanied by a certificate
that such officer has the
custody, is admissible to prove
that the records of his office
contain no such record or entry.
Proving genuineness of handwriting

[Rule 132, Sec. 22]
It may be proved by any witness
who believes it to be the
handwriting of such person
because:
a) He has seen the person write;
b) He has seen writing purporting
How to prove if document is offered

as authentic [Rule 132, sec. 20]
The document need only be
identified as that which it is
claimed to be.
c. IMPEACHMENT OF JUDICIAL RECORD

[Rule 132, Sec. 29]
Impeachment
is
done
using
evidence of:
1) Want of jurisdiction in the court
or judicial officer;
2) Collusion between the parties;
3) Fraud in the party offering the
record, in respect to the
proceedings.
d. ALTERATIONS [Rule 132, Sec. 31]
The party producing a document as
genuine, which has been altered
and appears to have been altered
after its execution, in a part material
to the question in dispute, must
account for the alteration.
Failure to do so would result in the
inadmissibility of evidence.
Such party may show that the
alteration was made:
1) By another;
2) Without his concurrence;
3) With the consent of the parties
affected by it;
Page 358 of 370
EVIDENCE
b. PRIVATE DOCUMENTS ;
How to prove if document is offered
as authentic [RULE 132, SEC. 20]
Its
due
execution
and
authenticity must be proved
either:
o By anyone who saw the
document executed/written;
o By
evidence
of
the
genuineness
of
the
signature/handwriting of the
maker.
Any other private document
need only be identified as that
which it is claimed to be.
AUTHENTIC DOCUMENT RULE
If all the following requisites
have been met, no other
evidence of its authenticity is
required: [Rule 132, Sec. 21]
o The private document is
more than 30 years old;
o It is produced from a custody
in which it would naturally
be found if genuine;
o It is unblemished by any
alterations or circumstances
of suspicion.
to be his upon which the witness

has acted or been charged, and
has thus acquired knowledge of
the handwriting of such person.
This constitutes an exception to
the opinion rule. [Rule 130, Sec.
48 and 50]
o Evidence
respecting
the
handwriting may also be
given by a comparison made
by the witness or the court,
o with writings admitted or
treated as genuine by the
party against whom the
evidence is offered, or proved
to be genuine to
the
satisfaction of the judge.
Rule 132, Sec. 22 merely
enumerates the methods of
proving handwriting, but does
not give preference or priority to
a particular method. [Lopez v.
CA (1978)]
Expert evidence may also be
admitted
to
prove
the
genuineness of the handwriting.
[Rule 130, Sec. 49]
4) Properly or innocently made;

5) Without changing the meaning
or language of the instrument.
e. SEAL [Rule 132, Sec. 32]
There shall be no difference between
sealed
and
unsealed
private
documents
insofar
as
their
admissibility
as
evidence
is
concerned.
f.
2.
DOCUMENTS
WRITTEN
IN
AN
UNOFFICIAL LANGUAGE [Rule 132,
Sec. 33]
These documents are not admissible
unless accompanied by a translation
into English or Filipino.
Parties or their attorneys are
directed to have the translation
prepared before trial.
DO DOCUMENTS COMPLY WITH BEST
EVIDENCE RULE? [Rule 130, Sec. 3]
b. Secondary Evidence
Original document is unavailable
(lost, destroyed or cannot be
produced in court);
The offeror, upon proof of its
execution/existence and cause
of its unavailability, without bad
faith on his part, may prove its
contents by (in order): [Rule 130,
Sec. 5]
1) A copy;
2) A recital of its contents in
some authentic document;
3) The testimony of witnesses.
Original document is in adverse
partys custody/control. [Rule 130,
Sec. 6]
If after reasonable notice is given
to the adverse party
to produce the document and
after satisfactory proof of the
existence of the document is
made, he fails to produce the
document,
secondary evidence may be
presented.
Original document is a public
record. [Rule 130, Sec. 7]
Its contents may be proved by a
certified copy issued by the
public officer in custody thereof.
The offeror of secondary evidence is
burdened to prove: [Lee v. People
(2004)]
1) The loss or destruction of the
original without bad faith on the
part of the proponent/offeror
which
can
be
shown
by
circumstantial
evidence
of
Page 359 of 370
EVIDENCE
a. Best Evidence (Asked 2x)

General rule: When the subject of
inquiry is the contents of a
document, no evidence shall be
admissible other than the original
document itself.
Exception:
a) When the original has been lost
or destroyed, or cannot be
produced in court, without bad
faith on the offerors part;
b) When the original is in custody
or under control of party against
whom evidence is offered, and
latter fails to produce it after
reasonable notice;
c) When the original consists of
numerous accounts or other
documents which cannot be
examined in court without great
loss of time, and the fact sought
to be established from them is
only the general result of the
whole;
d) When the original is a public
record in the custody of a public
officer or is recorded in a public
office.
Original of a document [Rule 130,
Sec. 4]
a) One the contents of which are
the subject of inquiry.
b) When a document is in 2 or
more copies executed at or about
the same time, with identical
contents, all such copies are
equally regarded as originals.

When an entry is repeated in the
regular course of business, one
being copied from another
at/near
the
time
of
the
transaction, all the entries are
likewise equally regarded as
originals.
Affidavits and
depositions
are
considered not the best evidence,
hence
not
admissible
if
the
affiants/deponents are available as
witnesses. [Regalado]
Carbon copies are deemed duplicate
originals. [People vs. Tan (1959)]
The BER does not apply when the
issue is only as to WON such
document was actually executed or
in the circumstances relevant to its
execution. [People v. Tandoy (1990)]
c)
routine practices of destruction

of documents;
2) The proponent must prove by a
fair preponderance of evidence
as to raise a reasonable
inference
of
the
loss
or
destruction of the original copy;
3) It must be shown that a diligent
and bona fide but unsuccessful
search has been made for the
document in the proper place or
places.
4) If the document is one in which
other
persons
are
also
interested, and which has been
placed in the hands of a
custodian for safekeeping, the
custodian must be required to
make
a
search
and
the
fruitlessness of such search
must
be
shown,
before
secondary evidence can be
admitted.
Where the original is in the custody
of the adverse party, it is not
necessary that it be in the actual
possession of the adverse party. It
is enough that the circumstances
show that the writing is in his
possession or under his control.
[Villa Rey Transit v. Ferrer (1968)]
The voluminous character of the
document must be established
before evidence other than the
original
may
be
introduced.
[Maritima v. Allied Free Workers
(1977)]
When the original is outside the
jurisdiction of the court, as when it
is in a foreign country, secondary
evidence is admissible. [PNB v. Olila]
A party who calls for the production
of a document and inspects it is not
obliged to offer it as evidence. [Rule
130, Sec. 8]
C. Object
Those addressed to the senses of the

court. [Rule 130, Sec. 1]
Includes the anatomy of a person or of
any substance taken therefrom. [US v.
Tan Teng]
General rule: When object is relevant to
the fact in issue, it may be exhibited to,
examined or viewed by the court. [Rule
130, Sec. 1]
Exception: Court may refuse exhibition
of object evidence and rely on
testimonial alone if:
1) Its exhibition is contrary to public

policy, morals or decency;
2) It
would
result
in
delays,
inconvenience,
unnecessary
expenses, out of proportion to the
evidentiary value of such object;
[People v. Tavera]
3) The evidence would be confusing or
misleading. [People v. Saavedra]
D. Circumstantial Evidence [Rule 133,

Sec. 4]
Requisites for circumstantial evidence

to be sufficient for conviction:
1) There is more than 1 circumstance;
2) The facts from which the inferences
are derived are proven;
3) The
combination
of
all
the
circumstances is such as to produce
a conviction beyond reasonable
doubt.
Under the RPC, one cannot be convicted

of treason by means of circumstantial
evidence. [Art. 114, RPC]
E. Extrajudicial Admissions
Any statement of fact made by a party

against his interest or unfavorable to
the conclusion for which he contends or
is inconsistent with the facts alleged by
him.
Types:
1) Verbal or written;
2) Express or tacit;
3) JUDICIAL One made in connection
with a judicial proceeding in which
it is offered;
EXTRAJUDICIAL Any admission
other than judicial (e.g. Rule 130,
Sec 26 and 32).
General rule: Any act/declaration/
omission of a party as to a relevant fact
may be given in evidence against him.
[Rule 130, Sec. 26]
Admission
Merely a statement of
fact
Confession
Maybe express or tacit
Involves
acknowledgement
guilt/liability
Must be express
an
of
Flight from justice is

an
admission
by
conduct
and
circumstantial
evidence
of
consciousness of guilt.
[US v. Sarikala]
The silence of an
accused under custody
or his failure to deny
statements by another
implicating him in a
crime
cannot
be
considered as a tacit
Page 360 of 370
EVIDENCE
Maybe made by 3rd

parties, and in certain
cases,
admissible
against a party
confession
of
his
participation in the
commission
of
the
crime. [People v. Alegre
(1979)]
Can be made only by
the party himself and
are admissible against
his co-accused in some
instances
Admission
Made
against
the
interest of the person
who admitted
Admissible in evidence
Admissible not only
against the party who
made
it
or
his
successors-ininterest,
but
also
against 3rd persons.
[Viacrucis v. CA (1986)]
Self-serving testimony
Made in favor of the
interest of the person
making the statement
Made in anticipation of
future litigation
Not
admissible
in
evidence
1. SELF-SERVING DECLARATIONS
Requisites
1) The statement was made extrajudicially;
2) The statement is in favor of the
declarants interest;
3) The statement was made in
anticipation of future litigation
3. COMPROMISE [Rule 130, Sec. 27

Civil cases An offer of compromise is
not an admission of any liability, and is
not admissible against the offeror.
Criminal cases An offer of compromise
by the accused may be received in
evidence as an implied admission of
guilt.
Exception:
4. RES INTER ALIOS ACTA [Rule 130, Sec.

28]
The rights of a party cannot be
prejudiced
by
an
act/declaration/omission of another.
(1st branch of the res inter alios acta
rule)
Only the admissions of a party-litigant
are admissible as substantive evidence.
Those of non-party witnesses may be
admitted for impeachment purposes
only.
Extra-judicial statements of an accused
implicating a co-accused may not be
utilized against the latter.
Exception: [People v. Raquel (1996)]
a) The co-accused impliedly acquiesced
in or adopted the confession by not
questioning its truthfulness;
b) The accused persons voluntarily
and
independently
executed
identical
confessions
without
Page 361 of 370
EVIDENCE
2. ADMISSION BY SILENCE [Rule 130, Sec.

32]
An act/declaration made in the
presence
and
within
the
hearing/observation of a party
who does/says nothing
when the act/declaration is such as
naturally to call for action/comment if
not true,
and when proper and possible for him
to do so, may be given in evidence
against him.
The rule does not apply if the
statements adverse to the party were
made in the course of an official
investigation. [US v. De la Cruz]
In cases involving quasi-offenses

(criminal negligence);
Those allowed by law to be
compromised.
An offer to pay or the payment of
medical, hospital or other expenses
occasioned by an injury is not
admissible in evidence as proof of
civil/criminal liability for the injury.
A plea of guilty later withdrawn, or an
unaccepted offer of a plea of guilty to
lesser offense, is not admissible in
evidence against the accused who made
the plea/offer.
In cases of public crimes,
the accused is permitted to show
that the offer was not made under a
consciousness of guilt
but
merely
to
avoid
the
inconvenience of imprisonment of
for some other reason
which would justify a claim by the
accused that the offer was not in
truth an admission of his guilt or an
attempt
to
avoid
the
legal
consequences
which
would
ordinarily ensue therefrom. [People
vs. Godoy (1995)]
A plea of forgiveness may be considered
as analogous to an attempt to
compromise. [People vs. De Guzman
(1996)]
An offer to compromise does not require
that a criminal complaint be first filed
before the offer can be received as
evidence against the offeror. [People vs.
Yparriguirre (1997)]
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
collusion and without contradiction

by the others present;
The accused admitted the facts after
being apprised of the confession;
If they are charged as coconspirators of the crime which was
confessed by 1 of the accused and
the confession is used only as a
corroborating evidence;
The
confession
is
used
as
circumstantial evidence to show the
probability of participation by the
co-conspirator;
The confessant testified for his codefendant;
The co-conspirators extra-judicial
confession is corroborated by other
evidence on record.
5. EXCEPTIONS TO
ACTA
RES
INTER ALIOS
a) Partners/agents admission; [Rule 130,

Sec. 29]
Requisites:
a) The act/declaration must be
within the scope of the authority
of the partner/agent.
b) The act/declaration must have
been made during the existence
of the partnership/agency.
c) The partnership or agency must
be shown by evidence other than
the act or declaration.
This
rule
applies
to
the
act/declaration of a joint owner,
joint debtor or other person jointly
interested with the party.
Statements
made
after
a
partnership has been dissolved do
not fall within this exception.
b) Co-conspirators admission; [Rule 130,

Sec. 30]
Requisites:
a) The act/declaration must relate
to the conspiracy;
b) It must have been made during
the existence of the conspiracy;
c) The conspiracy must be shown
by evidence other than such
act/declaration.
The existence of the conspiracy may

be inferred from the acts of the
accused. [People v. Belen (1963)]
Where there is no independent
evidence of the alleged conspiracy,
c) Admission by privies. [Rule 130, Sec. 31]

Where one derives title to property
from
another,
the
act/declaration/omission
of
the
latter, while holding the title, in
relation to the property, is evidence
against the former.
Requisites: [People v. Du]

a) There exists a relation of privity
between the party and the
declarant;
Privity in estate may have
arisen by succession, acts
mortis causa or acts inter
vivos. [Alpuerto v. Perez
Pastor]
b) Admission
was
made
by
declarant as predecessor-ininterest while holding title to
property;
c) Admission is in relation to the
property.
F. Electronic Evidence
1. WHAT EVIDENCE IS COVERED BY THE
REE? (R2,S1; R11, SS1-2, REE)
a) Electronic document
information or the representation of
information, data, figures, symbols
or
other
modes
of
written
expression,
described or however represented,
by which a right is established or an
obligation extinguished, or by which
a fact may be proved and affirmed,
which
is
received,
recorded,
transmitted,
stored
processed,
retrieved or produced electronically.
It
includes
digitally
signed
documents and any print-out or
output, readable by sight or other
means, which accurately reflects the
electronic
data
message
or
electronic document.
Page 362 of 370
EVIDENCE
the extra-judicial confession of an

accused cannot be used against his
co-accused as the res inter alios rule
applies
both
to
extra-judicial
confessions and admissions. [People
v. Alegre (1976)]
This rule in Rule 130, Sec. 30
applies
only
to
extra-judicial
statements, not to testimony given
on the stand. [People v. Serrano
(1959)]
b)
c)
d)
e)
For purposes of these Rules, the

term electronic document may be
used interchangeably with electronic
data message.
Electronic data message - information
generated, sent, received or stored by
electronic, optical or similar means.
Audio recording
Photograph Video recording
Ephemeral
evidence
telephone
conversations, text messages, chatroom
sessions, streaming audio, streaming
video, and other electronic forms of
communication the evidence of which is
not recorded or retained.
2. WHEN
AND
TO
WHAT
ADMISSIBLE? (R3,S2, REE)
EXTENT
An electronic document is admissible in

evidence if it complies with the rules on
admissibility prescribed by the Rules of
Court and related laws and is
authenticated in the manner prescribed
by these Rules.
a) Privileged Communication (R3,s3, REE)

The confidential character of a
privileged communications is not
solely on the ground that it is in the
form of an electronic document.
c) Authentication (R5, ss1-3; R11, ss1-2,

REE)
The person seeking to introduce an
electronic document in any legal
proceeding has the burden of
proving its authenticity in the
manner provided in this Rule.
Before
any
private
electronic
document offered as authentic is
received in evidence, its authenticity
must be proved by any of the
following means:
a. by evidence that it had been
digitally signed by the person
purported to have signed the
same;
b. by
evidence
that
other
appropriate
security
procedures or devices as may
A document electronically notarized

in accordance with the rules
promulgated by the Supreme Court
shall be considered as a public
document and proved as a notarial
document under the Rules of
Court.
d) Best Evidence Rules (R4, ss1-2, REE)

An electronic document shall be
regarded as the equivalent of an
original document under the Best
Evidence Rule if it is a printout or
output readable by sight or other
means, shown to reflect the data
accurately.
When a document is in two or more
copies executed at or about the
same time with identical contents,
or is a counterpart produced by
the same impression as the
original, or from the same
matrix, or
by mechanical or electronic rerecording,
or
by
chemical
reproduction,
or
by
other
equivalent techniques
which accurately reproduces the
original,
such
copies
or
duplicates shall be regarded as
the equivalent of the original.
Notwithstanding
the
foregoing,
copies or duplicates shall not be
admissible to the same extent as the
original if:
a. a genuine question is raised as
to the authenticity of the
original; or
b. in the circumstances it would be
unjust or inequitable to admit a
copy in lieu of the original.
3. EVIDENTIARY WEIGHT OF ELECTRONIC
EVIDENCE (R7, SS1-2)
In assessing the evidentiary weight of

an electronic document, the following
factors may be considered:
a. The reliability of the manner or
method in which it was generated,
Page 363 of 370
EVIDENCE
b) Functional equivalence (R3, s1, REE)

Whenever a rule of evidence refers to
the term of writing, document,
record, instrument, memorandum
or any other form of writing, such
term shall be deemed to include an
electronic document as defined in
these Rules.
be authorized by the Supreme

Court
or
by
law
for
authentication
of
electronic
documents were applied to the
document; or
c. by other evidence showing its
integrity and reliability to the
satisfaction of the judge.
Text messages have been classified as

ephemeral
electronic
communication under Section 1(k),
Rule 2 of the Rules on Electronic
Evidence, and shall be proven by the
testimony of a person who was a party
to the same or has personal knowledge
thereof. [Vidallon-Magtolis v. Salud
(2005)]
4. THE HEARSAY RULE AND THE

BUSINESS RECORDS EXCEPTION (R9,
SS1-2)
All matters relating to the admissibility

and evidentiary weight of an electronic
document may be established by an
affidavit stating facts of direct personal
knowledge of the affiant or based on
authentic records.
The affidavit must affirmatively show
the competence of the affiant to testify
on the matters contained therein.
The affiant shall be made to affirm the
contents of the affidavit in open court
and may be cross-examined as a matter
of right by the adverse party.
EVIDENCE
stored or communicated, including

but not limited to
input and output procedures,
controls, tests and checks for
accuracy and reliability of the
electronic data message or
document,
in
the
light
of
all
the
circumstances as well as any
relevant agreement;
b. The reliability of the manner in
which its originator was identified;
c. The integrity of the information and
communication system in which it is
recorded or stored, including but
not limited to the hardware and
computer programs or software
used as well as programming
errors;
d. The familiarity of the witness or the
person who made the entry with the
communication and information
system;
e. The nature and quality of the
information which went into the
communication and information
system upon which the electronic
data
message
or
electronic
document was based; or
f. Other factors which the court may
consider as affecting the accuracy or
integrity of the electronic document
or electronic data message.
In any dispute involving the integrity of
the information and communication
system in which an electronic document
or electronic data message is recorded
or stored, the court may consider,
among others, the following factors:
a. Whether
the
information
and
communication system or other
similar device was operated in a
manner that did not affect the
integrity of the electronic document,
and there are no other reasonable
grounds to doubt the integrity of the
information and communication
system;
b. Whether the electronic document
was recorded or stored by a party to
the
proceedings
with
interest
adverse to that of the party using it;
or
c. Whether the electronic document
was recorded or stored in the usual
and ordinary course of business by
a person who is not a party tot he
proceedings and who did not act
under the control of the party using
it.
Page 364 of 370
Chapter VI:
How Do I Present and Offer the
Evidence at Trial?
A. ORDER OF PROOF
1. MANNER OF EXAMINATION
2. MODE OF ANSWERING
3. EXCEPTIONS IN GENERAL
4. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
5. TRANSCRIPT
6. RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS
7. ORDER OF EXAMINATION
B. FORM OF QUESTIONS
1. LEADING
AND
MISLEADING
QUESTIONS
C. OFFER OF EVIDENCE
1. OFFER OF EVIDENCE
2. WHEN TO MAKE OFFER
D. OBJECTIONS
1. WHEN REPETITION OF OBJECTION IS
UNNECESSARY
2. RULING ON THE OBJECTION
3. MOTION TO STRIKE
E. TENDER OF EXCLUDED EVIDENCE
F. ELECTRONIC EXAMINATION OF WITNESS
G. EXAMINATION OF A CHILD WITNESS
1. SCOPE AND APPLICABILITY
2. CHILD WITNESS
3. EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC DURING
THE CHILD'S EXAMINATION
4. ALTERNATIVE MODES OF GIVING
TESTIMONY
5. WHEN
TO
TAKE
THE
CHILD'S
TESTIMONY
6. PROVISIONS FOR EASE OF CHILD IN
TESTIFYING
7. HEARSAY
EXCEPTION
IN
CHILD
ABUSE CASES
8. SEXUAL ABUSE SHIELD RULE
9. OTHER PROTECTIVE MEASURES
Chapter VI: How Do I Present and Offer the Evidence at Trial?
3. EXCEPTIONS IN GENERAL
a) Testimony of witness in civil cases may
be given by depositions. [Rule 23 and
24]
b) Depositions or conditional examinations
are allowed in criminal cases. [Rule 119
and 123]
Mere presentation of the affidavits of
prosecution witnesses subject to
cross-examination is not allowed by
the ROC. [People v. Estenzo (1976)]
c) Affidavits are allowed in cases covered
by Rule on Summary Procedure
Although affidavits of witnesses are
allowed/admissible under the Rule on
Summary Procedure, these may not
have any probative value. [Heirs of
Sabanpan v. Comorposa, (2003)]
4. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS [Rule 132,
Sec. 2]
5. TRANSCRIPT
A. Order of Proof
In open court;
Under oath/affirmation.
2. MODE OF ANSWERING
General rule: Oral answers.

Exception:
1. Witness is incapacitated to speak;
2. Question calls for a different mode
of answer.
The testimony of the witness should be
elicited by questions of counsel. But the
court may itself propound questions
either
on
the
direct
or
cross
examination of the witness. [People v.
Moreno (1988)]
TSN shall be made by the official

stenographer/ stenotypist/recorder. He
shall certify it as correct, and it shall be
deemed prima facie a correct statement
of the proceedings.
That a judge did not hear a case does
not necessarily render him less
competent in assessing the credibility of
witnesses. He can rely on the TSN of
their testimony and calibrate them in
accordance with their conformity to
common experience, knowledge and
observation of ordinary men. Such
reliance does not violate substantive
and procedural due process of law.
[People v. Cadley (2004)]
6. RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS [Rule 132,

Sec. 3]
Obligation of a witness: To answer

questions, although his answer may
tend to establish a claim against him.
Rights of a witness:
a) To be protected from irrelevant,
improper, or insulting questions,
Page 365 of 370
EVIDENCE
1. MANNER OF EXAMINATION [Rule 132,

Sec. 1]
The entire proceedings of a trial/hearing

should be recorded, including:
The questions propounded to a
witness and his answer thereto;
Statements made by the judge or
any
of
the
parties/counsels/witnesses
with
reference to the case.
b)
c)
d)
e)
and from harsh or insulting

demeanor;
Not to be detained longer than the
interests of justice require;
Not to be examined except only as to
matters pertinent to the issue;
Not to give an answer which will
tend to subject him to a penalty for
an
offense,
unless
otherwise
provided by law;
Unless provided by law refers
to immunity statutes such as
those which the witness is
granted immunity from criminal
prosecution
for
offenses
admitted (e.g. Sec. 8, RA 1379).
Not to give an answer which will
tend to degrade his reputation,
unless it to be the very fact at issue
or to a fact from which the fact in
issue would be presumed. But a
witness must answer to the fact of
his previous final conviction for an
offense.
B. Form of Questions
1. LEADING AND MISLEADING QUESTIONS
[Rule 132, Sec. 10]
7. ORDER OF EXAMINATION [Rule 132,

Sec. 4]
RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION
[Rule 132, Sec. 7]
When
conducted:
After
the
crossexamination of the witness has been
concluded.
Why conducted: To explain or supplement
his answers given during the crossexamination.
On re-direct-examination, the court in

its discretion may allow questions on
matters not dealt with during the crossexamination.
C. Offer of Evidence
(Asked 3x)
1. OFFER OF EVIDENCE [Rule 132, Sec. 34]
RE-CROSS EXAMINATION
[Rule 132, Sec. 8]
When conducted: Upon the conclusion of the
re-direct examination.
Matters covered: The adverse party may recross-examine the witness on matters stated
in his re-direct examination, and also on such
other matters as may be allowed by the court
in its discretion.
Purpose: For evidence to be considered

by the court.
In making the offer, the purpose for
which the evidence is offered must be
specified, because such evidence may
be admissible for several purposes
under
the
doctrine
of
multiple
admissibility.
The rule may be relaxed, provided the
evidence must have duly identified by
testimony duly recorded and they must
have been incorporated in the records of
the case. [Vda. De Orate v. CA (1995)]
Page 366 of 370
EVIDENCE
DIRECT EXAMINATION
[Rule 132, Sec. 5]
Examination-in-chief of a witness by the
party presenting him, on the facts relevant
to the issue.
MISLEADING QUESTIONS Questions

that assume as true a fact not yet
testified to by the witness, or contrary
to that which he has previously stated.
They are not allowed.
LEADING QUESTIONS Questions that
suggest to the witness the answer which
the examining party desires.
General rule: Leading questions are not
allowed.
Exception:
a) On cross examination;
b) On preliminary matters;
c) When there is a difficulty is getting
direct and intelligible answers from
a witness who is ignorant, or a child
of tender years, or is of feeble mind,
or a deaf-mute;
d) On an unwilling or hostile witness;
A witness may be considered
hostile only when declared by
the
court,
upon
adequate
showing of his: [Rule 132, Sec.
12]
o Adverse interest;
o Unjustified reluctance to
testify;
o His having misled the party
into calling him to the
witness stand.
e) On a witness who is an adverse party
or an officer/director or managing
agent
of
a
public/private
corporation
or
of
a
partnership/association which is an
adverse party.
2. WHEN TO MAKE OFFER [Rule 132, Sec.

35]
2. RULING ON THE OBJECTION [Rule 132,

Sec. 38]
Kind of evidence
Testimonial
When to offer
At the time the witness is
called to testify
Documentary
After the presentation of a
and Object
partys testimonial evidence
Offer shall be done orally unless allowed by the
court to be done in writing.
Absence of an offer is a defect which is

waived when a party fails to object when
the
ground
became
reasonably
apparent, as when the witness is called
to testify without any prior offer.
[Catuira v. CA (1994)]
The defect caused by the absence of
formal offer of exhibits can be cured by
the identification of the exhibits by
testimony duly recorded and the
incorporation of the said exhibits in the
records of the case. [People v. Mate
(1981)]
D. Objections
What to object to
Testimonial evidence
It should be given immediately after the

objection is made, unless the court
desires to take a reasonable time to
inform itself on the question presented.
But the ruling shall always be made
during the trial and at such time as will
give the party against whom it is made
an opportunity to meet the situation
presented by the ruling.
The reason for sustaining or overruling
an objection need not be stated.
However, if the objection is based on
two or more grounds, a ruling
sustaining the objection on one or some
of them must specify the ground/s
relied upon.
Reservation of a ruling by the court on
an objection to the admissibility of
evidence,
without
subsequently
excluding the same, amounts to a
denial of an objection. [People v. Tavera]
3. MOTION TO STRIKE [Rule 132, Sec. 39]
When to object
Immediately after offer
is made
Question propounded As
soon
as
the
in the course of oral grounds
become
examination
reasonably apparent
Offer done in writing
Within 3 days after
notice of the offer,
unless
a
different
period is allowed by
the court
The grounds for objection
must be specified in any case.
1. WHEN REPETITION OF OBJECTION IS

UNNECESSARY [Rule 132, Sec. 37]
E. Tender of Excluded Evidence
When it becomes reasonably apparent

in the course of the examination of a
witness that the questions being
propounded are of the same class as
those to which objection has been
made, whether such objection was
sustained or overruled.
It shall be sufficient for the adverse
party to record his continuing objection
to such class of questions.
A court may, motu proprio, treat the
objection as a continuing one. [Keller v.
Ellerman & Bucknall Steamship]
(R132, s40)
Kind of evidence
Documentary
Testimonial
How to tender the evidence

Offeror may have the same
attached or made part of
the record
Offeror may state for the
record the name and other
personal circumstances of
the
witness
and
the
substance of the proposed
testimony
Documents marked as exhibits during

the hearing but which were not formally
offered
in
evidence
cannot
be
considered as evidence nor shall they
have evidentiary value. [Vda. De Flores
v. WCC (1977)]
Page 367 of 370
EVIDENCE
The court may sustain an objection and

order the answer given to be stricken off
the record
should a witness answer the question
before the adverse party had the
opportunity to voice fully its objection
and such objection is found to be
meritorious.
The court may also, upon motion, order
the striking out of answers, which are
incompetent, irrelevant or otherwise
improper.
Identification of
documentary evidence
Done in the course of
the trial and is
accompanied by the
marking of the
evidence
That a document has
been identified does
not mean that it will
be offered
Formal offer of
exhibit
Done only
when the
party rests
his/her
case
[Interpacific Transit v. Aviles (1990)]
F. Electronic
Witnesses
Examination
of
(R10, s1, REE)
After summarily hearing the parties

pursuant to Rule 9 of these Rules, the
court may authorize the presentation of
testimonial evidence by electronic
means.
Before so authorizing, the court shall
determine the necessity for such
presentation and prescribe terms and
conditions as may be necessary under
the
circumstance,
including
the
protection of the rights of the parties
and witnesses concerned.
G. Examination of a Child Witness

1. SCOPE AND APPLICABILITY
2. CHILD WITNESS
a) Any person who at the time of giving
testimony is < 18 years;
b) In child abuse cases, a child includes
one over 18 years but is found by the
court as unable to fully take care of
himself
or
protect
himself
from
abuse/neglect/cruelty/exploitation/
discrimination
because
of
a
physical/mental disability or condition.
Every child is presumed qualified to be
a witness. To rebut the presumption of
competence enjoyed by a child, the
burden of proof lies on the party
3. EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC DURING

THE CHILDS EXAMINATION
To protect the right to the childs

privacy;
If the court determines on the record
that requiring the child to testify in
open court would cause psychological
harm to him, hinder the ascertainment
of truth, or result in his inability to
effectively
communicate
due
to
embarrassment/fear/timidity.
4. ALTERNATIVE
TESTIMONY
MODES
OF
GIVING
a) Live-link
television
testimony,
in
criminal cases where the child is a
victim or a witness. [Sec. 25]
The court may order that the
testimony of the child be taken by
live-link television
if there is a substantial likelihood
that the child would suffer trauma
from testifying in the presence of the
accused, his counsel or the
prosecutor.
The trauma must be of a kind which
would
impair
the
completeness/truthfulness of the
childs testimony.
If it is necessary for the child to
identify the accused at trial,
the court may allow the child to
enter the courtroom for the limited
purpose of identifying the accused,
or the court may allow the child to
identify the accused by observing
the image of the latter on a
television monitor.
b) Screens, one-way mirrors and other
devices to shield child from accused.
[Sec. 26]
Page 368 of 370
EVIDENCE
It shall govern the examination of child

witnesses who are victims of crime,
accused of a crime, and witnesses to
crime. It shall apply in all criminal
proceedings
and
non-criminal
proceedings involving child witnesses.
[Sec. 1]
The ROC provisions on deposition,
conditional examination of witnesses
and
evidence
shall
be
applied
suppletorily. [Sec. 32]
challenging his competence. [Sec. 6(b)]

When the court finds that substantial
doubt exists regarding the ability of the
child
to
perceive/remember/
communicate, distinguish truth from
falsehood, or appreciate the duty to tell
the truth in court, a competency exam
shall be conducted.
The age of the child by itself is not a
sufficient basis for a competency
examination. [Sec. 6(a)]
The court has the duty of
continuously
assessing
the
competence of the child throughout
his testimony. [Sec. 6(f)]
c) Videotaped deposition. [Sec. 27]

If the court finds that the child will
not be able to testify in open court
at trial, it shall issue an order that
the deposition of the child be taken
and preserved by videotape.
The rights of the accused during
trial, especially the right to counsel
and to confront and cross-examine
the child, shall not be violated
during the deposition.
5. WHEN
TO
TESTIMONY
TAKE
THE
j)
CHILDS
The court may order that the testimony

of the child should be taken during a
time of day when the child is wellrested. [Sec. 14]
6. PROVISIONS FOR EASE OF CHILD IN

TESTIFYING
7. HEARSAY EXCEPTION IN CHILD ABUSE

CASES [Sec. 28]
Before the hearsay statement may be

admitted, its proponent shall make
known to the adverse party the
intention to offer such statement and its
particulars to provide him a fair
opportunity to object.
If the child is available, the court
shall require the child to be present
at the presentation of the hearsay
statement for cross-examination by
the adverse party.
If the child is unavailable, the fact of
unavailability must be proved by the
proponent
and
his
hearsay
testimony shall be admitted only if
corroborated by other admissible
evidence.
8. SEXUAL ABUSE SHIELD RULE [Sec. 30]
General rule: The following evidence

are inadmissible in any criminal
proceeding involving alleged child
sexual abuse:
1) Evidence offered to prove that the
alleged victim engaged in other
sexual behavior;
2) Evidence offered to prove the sexual
predisposition of the alleged victim.
Exception:
Evidence
of
specific
instances of sexual behavior by the
alleged victim to prove that a person
other than the accused was the source
of semen, injury or other physical
evidence shall be admissible.
9. OTHER PROTECTIVE MEASURES
Video/audio tapes that are part of the

court record may be viewed only by
parties, their counsel, their expert
Page 369 of 370
EVIDENCE
a) Interpreter for child. [Sec. 9]

b) Facilitator to pose questions to child.
[Sec. 10]
c) Support persons. [Sec. 11]
A child testifying at a judicial
proceeding or making a deposition shall
have the right to be accompanied by 1
or 2 persons of his own choosing to
provide him emotional support.
d) Waiting area for child witnesses that is
separate from waiting areas used by
other persons. [Sec. 12]
e) Courtroom environment is made a more
comfortable environment for the child.
[Sec. 13]
f) Recess during testimony: The child may
be allowed reasonable periods of relief
while undergoing direct, cross, re-direct,
and re-cross examinations as often as
necessary
depending
on
his
developmental level. [Sec. 15]
g) Testimonial
aids:
use
of
dolls,
anatomically-correct dolls, puppets,
drawings, mannequins, or any other
appropriate demonstrative device to
assist him in his testimony. [Sec. 16]
h) Emotional
security
item:
While
testifying, a child shall be allowed to
have an item of his own choosing such
as a blanket/toy/doll. [Sec. 17]
i) Conduct in questioning the witness: The
court shall exercise control over the
questioning of children so as to: [Sec.
19]
Facilitate the ascertainment of the
truth;
Ensure that questions are stated in
a form appropriate to the childs

developmental level;
Protect children from harassment or
undue embarrassment;
Avoid waste of time.
The court may allow the child
witness to testify in a narrative
form.
Weight given to testimony of child
witness: His testimony, if credible by
itself, shall be sufficient to support a
finding of fact/conclusion/judgment
subject to the standard of proof
required in criminal and non-criminal
cases. [Sec. 22]
witness and the guardian ad litem.

But they cannot divulge the tape (or any
portion thereof) to any other person,
except as necessary for the trial.
The court may issue additional orders to
protect the childs privacy.
Publication (or causing it) in any format
any identifying information of a child
who is or is alleged to be a
victim/accused of a crime or a witness
thereof, or an immediate family of the
child, shall be liable for contempt of
court.
A child has a right at any court
proceeding not to testify regarding
personal identifying information that
could endanger his physical safety or
his family.
However, the court may require the
child to testify regarding personal
identifying information in the interest of
justice.
The records of a youthful offender shall

be considered as privileged and may not
be disclosed in/directly to anyone for
any purpose whatsoever.
Exception: If he has been charged
and the court acquits him, or
dismisses the case or commits him
to an institution and subsequently
releases him pursuant to Chap. 3,
PD 603:
1) To determine if he may have his
sentence suspended (under Art.
192, PD 603);
2) To determine if he may be
granted probation (under PD
968);
3) To enforce his civil liability, if
said liability has been imposed
in the criminal action.
EVIDENCE
- end of Evidence -
- end of Remedial Law -
Page 370 of 370

UP 2009 Remedial Law (Evidence) PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

UP 2009 Remedial Law (Evidence) PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

REVIEWER IN REMEDIAL LAW

Chapter II: WHICH OF THE FACTS

Chapter III: WHO MUST PROVE

Chapter IV: WHAT DEGREE OF

Chapter V: WHAT AVAILABLE

e. Common reputation [rule

Page 341 of 370

Chapter I: GENERAL PROVISIONS

REVIEWER IN REMEDIAL LAW

Chapter VI: HOW DO I PRESENT

Page 342 of 370

REVIEWER IN REMEDIAL LAW

Chapter I: General Provisions

Bryan San Juan

PRINTING AND DISTRIBUTION

DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ACADEMICS

The means, sanctioned by these rules,

General Rule: Rules of evidence shall be

Evidence not excluded by law or ROC.

Page 343 of 370

LOGO, COVER AND TEMPLATE DESIGN

REVIEWER IN REMEDIAL LAW

Chapter II: Which of the Facts Do Not Need Proof

WHEN DISCRETIONARY [Rule 129, Sec.

WHEN HEARING IS NECESSARY [Rule

WHEN MANDATORY [Rule 129, Sec. 1]

General rule: Courts are not mandated

Admissions, verbal or written, made by

Page 344 of 370

Courts cannot take judicial notice of

REVIEWER IN REMEDIAL LAW

Duty of a party to present evidence on

CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTIONS [Rule

DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTIONS [Rule

Page 345 of 370

General rule: All facts in issue and

the commencement of the relation of

REVIEWER IN REMEDIAL LAW

When Child was Born

the title of such person or his

When 2 persons perish in the same calamity,

35) As between 2 or more persons called to

A thing once proved to exist

REVIEWER IN REMEDIAL LAW

Chapter IV: What Degree of Proof Is Needed?

General rule: Findings of the judge who

Exception: The rule does not apply

Rationale: The latter judge is not in a

The number of witnesses should not in

1. PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE (CIVIL

In determining preponderance, the

2. PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT

Page 347 of 370

REVIEWER IN REMEDIAL LAW

no longer a general inquiry into

2. CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE [Rule 133,

Requisites for circumstantial evidence

Page 348 of 370

EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSIONS [Rule 133,

Chapter IV: What Degree of Proof Is Needed?

REVIEWER IN REMEDIAL LAW

Chapter V: What Available Evidence Is Admissible to Prove These Facts?