Object ( Real ) Evidence:

Nature of object evidence

Requisites for admissibility
Categories of object evidence
Demonstrative evidence
View of an object or scene
Chain of custody, in relation to sec 21 of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs acts
of 2002
Rule on DNA Evidence ( A.M. No. 06-11-5-SC )
a. Meaning of DNA
b. Applicable for DNA testing order
c. Post-conviction DNA testing: remedy
d. Assessment of probative value of DNA evidence and admissibility
e. Rules on evaluation of reliability of the DNA testing methodology - sec 8

x x

A. Nature of Object Evidence:

Rule 130 Section 1: Object as evidence. Object as evidence are those addressed to the senses of
the court. When an object is relevant to the fact in issue, it may be exhibited to, examined or
viewed by the court.

Real Evidence:

Physical or tangible evidence presented to the trier of fact for inspection as relevant to an issue in
the case.

Physical evidence is evidence to the highest order. It prevails over testimonial evidence.

Admissibility of Real Evidence:

Must be Relevant
Must not be hearsay
Must not be previleged
Must meet any additional requirement (e.g. it must not be the result of an illegal search and
seizure or in violation of any pre-trial order)

Categories of Real Evidence:

( in re: authentication )

Objects that have readily identifiable marks

example: Serial number of a calibre .45 pistol
Objects that are made readily identifiable (objects made unique)
 example: Kitchen knife that acquire a unique characteristic like
placing identifying marks on it.
Objects with no identifying marks (non-unique object)

Riano P107

Demonstrative Evidence:

Distinguished to Real Evidence: is not the real thing, instead, it has tangible or exemplifying
purposes. Is is a visual aid.

Distinction not always clear, depends on the use to be made of it.

our rule does not make such distinction: When an object is relevant to the fact in issue, it
may be exhibited to, examined or viewed by the court.

Types:

a. Selected Demonstrative Evidence: e.g. exisitng, genuine handwriting specimens used as

standards of comparison by a handwriting expert
b. Prepared or reproduced demonstrative evidence: made specifically for trial

Testimonial Foundation required

View of the object

- If object can be brought to the courtroom, the court can have it exhibited before it through a
witness who
may present it as an exhibit during his testimony and thereafter the court may have it examined
or viewed in open court during trial in the presence of the parties.

View of the scene

- Immovable or inconvenient to remove like buildings machinery animals or other heavy
objects, the natural
tendency is for the tribunal to go to the object in its place and there observe it
- Inspection or view of the object should be made in the presence of the parties in open court an
at all times subject to the control of the court, if made inside the courtroom or in connection with
the trial, if made outside thereof

Chain of custody:

a. Apprehending team shall make a physical inventory and photograph of the objects seized in
the presence of the (1) accused or his representative, (2) representative from the media, (3)
representative from the DOJ; and (4) any elected public official.
b. The objects seized must be submitted to the PDEA for qualitative and quantitative
examination within 24 hrs.

c. A certification of the results must be issued by the forensic laboratory within 24 hrs after
receipt.

d. If the volume does not allow completion of testing within the time frame, partial results may
be issued. Thereafter, the completed result must be issued within the next 24 hrs.

e. ocular inspection by the court within 72 hrs after filing the criminal case. Destruction or
burning of the objects shall proceed through the PDEA.

f. Issuance by the Board of a sworn certification of the fact of destruction or burning to be

submitted to the court.

g. The alleged offender, his representative or counsel is allowed to personally observe the
proceedings. Their presence is not an admission of guilt to the commission of the crime.

Doctrine of Chain of Custody:

The duly recorded authorized movements and custody of seized drugs or controlled chemicals or
plant sources of dangerous drugs or laboratory equipment of each stage, from the time of
seizure/confiscation to receipt in the forensic laboratory to safekeeping to presentation in court
for destruction. Such record movements and custody of seized item shall include the identity and
signature of the person who held temporary custody of the seized item, the date and time when
such transfer of custody were made in the course of safekeeping and used in court as evidence,
and the final disposition.

Chain of custody in Drugs-related cases:

The prosecution must account for the custody of the incriminating evidence from the moment of
seizure and confiscation until the moment it is offered in evidence. That account goes to the
weight of evidence. It is not enough that the evidence offered has probative value on the issues,
for the evidence must also be sufficiently connected to and tied with the facts in issue. The
evidence is not relevant merely because it is available but that it has an actual connection with
the transaction involved and with the parties thereto. This is the reason why authentication and
laying a foundation for the introduction of evidence are important.

DNA:

Deoxyribonucleic Acid
Chain of molecules found in every nucleated cell of the body. The totality of an individuals DNA
is unique for the individual, except identical twins.
Sec. 4. Application for DNA Testing Order. The appropriate court may, at any time, either motu
proprio or on application of any person who has a legal interest in the matter in litigation, order a
DNA testing. Such order shall issue after due hearing and notice to the parties upon a showing of
the following:

A biological sample exists that is relevant to the case;

The biological sample: (i) was not previously subjected to the type of DNA testing
now requested; or (ii) was previously subjected to DNA testing, but the results may require
confirmation for good reasons;

The DNA testing uses a scientifically valid technique;

The DNA testing has the scientific potential to produce new information that is
relevant to the proper resolution of the case; and

The existence of other factors, if any, which the court may consider as potentially
affecting the accuracy of integrity of the DNA testing.

This Rule shall not preclude a DNA testing, without need of a prior court order, at the behest of
any party, including law enforcement agencies, before a suit or proceeding is commenced.

Sec. 6. Post-conviction DNA Testing. Post-conviction DNA testing may be available, without
need of prior court order, to the prosecution or any person convicted by final and executory
judgment provided that (a) a biological sample exists, (b) such sample is relevant to the case, and
(c) the testing would probably result in the reversal or modification of the judgment of conviction.

Sec. 10. Post-conviction DNA Testing Remedy if the Results Are Favorable to the Convict.
The convict or the prosecution may file a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the court of origin
if the results of the post-conviction DNA testing are favorable to the convict. In the case the court,
after due hearing finds the petition to be meritorious, if shall reverse or modify the judgment of
conviction and order the release of the convict, unless continued detention is justified for a lawful
cause.
A similar petition may be filed either in the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court, or with any
member of said courts, which may conduct a hearing thereon or remand the petition to the court
of origin and issue the appropriate orders.

Sec. 8. Reliability of DNA Testing Methodology. In evaluating whether the DNA testing
methodology is reliable, the court shall consider the following:

The falsifiability of the principles or methods used, that is, whether the theory or
technique can be and has been tested;

The subjection to peer review and publication of the principles or methods;

 The general acceptance of the principles or methods by the relevant scientific
community;

The existence and maintenance of standards and controls to ensure the correctness of
data generated;

The existence of an appropriate reference population database; and

The general degree of confidence attributed to mathematical calculations used in

comparing DNA profiles and the significance and limitation of statistical calculations used in
comparing DNA profiles.