UST Golden Notes - Evidence-Libre PDF

UST GOLDEN NOTES 2011
EVIDENCE A: No. Any evidence inadmissible according to the

laws in force at the time the action accrued, but
A. GENERAL PRINCIPLES admissible according to the laws in force at the
time of the trial is receivable.
1. CONCEPT OF EVIDENCE
3. EVIDENCE IN CIVIL CASES VERSUS EVIDENCE IN
Q: What is evidence? CRIMINAL CASES
A: Evidence is the means, sanctioned by the Rules Q: Distinguish Evidence in Civil Cases from
of Court, of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the Evidence in Criminal Cases.
truth respecting a matter of fact. (Sec. 1, Rule 128)
A:
Q: What are the four component elements? Civil Cases Criminal Cases
A: The party having the The guilt of the accused

burden of proof must
1. Means of ascertainment – includes not has to be proven
prove his claim by a
only the procedure or manner of beyond reasonable
preponderance of
ascertainment but also the evidentiary doubt
evidence
fact from which the truth respecting a An offer of compromise An offer of compromise
matter of fact may be ascertained is not an admission of by the accused may be
2. Sanctioned by the rules – not excluded by any liability, and is not received in evidence as
the Rules of Court admissible in evidence an implied admission of
3. In a judicial proceeding – contemplates an against the offeror guilt
action or proceeding filed in a court of law The concept of The accused enjoys the
4. The truth respecting a matter of fact – presumption of constitutional
refers to an issue of fact and is both innocence does not presumption of
substantive (determines the facts needed apply innocence
to be established) and procedural
(governs the manner of proving said 4. PROOF VERSUS EVIDENCE
facts).
Q: Distinguish proof from evidence.
Q: Why is evidence required?
A:
A: It is required because of the presumption that Proof Evidence
the court is not aware of the veracity of the facts The effect when the The mode and manner
involved in a case. It is therefore incumbent upon requisite quantum of
of proving competent
the parties to prove a fact in issue thru the evidence of a particular
facts in judicial
fact has been duly
presentation of admissible evidence (Riano, proceedings
admitted and given weight
Evidence: A Restatement for the Bar, p. 2, 2009 ed.).
The probative effect of
The means of proof
evidence
2. SCOPE OF THE RULES OF EVIDENCE
Q: What is the scope of the Rules of Evidence? 5. FACTUM PROBANSVERSUSFACTUM

PROBANDUM
A: The rules of evidence shall be the same in all
courts and in all trials and hearings, except as Q: Distinguish factum probandum from factum
probans.
otherwise provided by law or by these rules. It is
guided by the principle of uniformity. (Sec. 2, Rule
A:
128).
Factum Probandum Factum Probans
NOTE: It does not apply to election cases, land
The ultimate fact sought
registration, cadastral, naturalization and insolvency The intermediate facts
proceedings, and other cases, except by analogy or in to be established
suppletory character and whenever practicable and Proposition to be Materials which establish
established the proposition
convenient. (Sec. 4, Rule 1, Rules of Court ) Hypothetical Existent
Q: Are there vested rights under the Rules of
Evidence? Note: Every evidentiary question involves the
relationship between the factum probandum and
factum probans.
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
294 ADVISER: JUDGE MYRA B. QUIAMBAO , JUSTICE OSCAR C. HERRERA , JR., JUSTICE JAIME M. LANTIN , JUDGE CESAR D. STAMARIA , SR.;
SUBJECT HEAD: ANGELI P. ALBAÑA ; ASST. SUBJECTHEADS: DARRELL L. BAGANG, DIANE CAMILLA R. BORJA , YRIZ TAMIE A. MARIANO ,
MA. KATRINA NADINE G. JUANENGO ; MEMBERS: AKEMI B. AIDA, TERESE RAY-ANNE O. AQUINO , GRETCHEN C. SY, RHONDEE E. DUMLAO ,
KRISTINE P. MIJARES , DONNA GRAGASIN, EDELISE D. PINEDA , SHERY PAIGE A. LIM, MARA KHRISNA CHARMINA F. MENDOZA, UNICA AMOR
R. MANANQUIL , MICHAEL ANGELO V. FLORES ; CONTRIBUTORS: VICENTE JAN O. PLATON III, RONN ROBBY D. ROSALES
EVIDENCE
6. ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE of exception to the general admissibility

of all that is rational and probative.
Q: Distinguish admissibility of evidence from
probative value of evidence. b. RELEVANCE OF EVIDENCE AND COLLATERAL
MATTERS
A:
Admissibility Probative Value Q: What is meant by relevance of evidence?
Question of whether certain Question of whether
pieces of evidence are to be the admitted evidence A: Evidence must have such a relation to the fact in
considered at all. proves an issue. issue as to induce belief in its existence or non-
existence.
Note: Thus, a particular item of evidence may be
admissible, but its evidentiary weight depends on Q: Is evidence on collateral matters allowed?
judicial evaluation within the guidelines provided by
the rules of evidence (Heirs of Sabanpan v. Comorposa, A: Evidence on collateral matters shall not be
G.R. No. 152807, Aug. 12, 2003). allowed, except when it tends in any reasonable
degree to establish the probability or improbability
a. REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE of the fact in issue. (Sec. 4, Rule 128)
Q: What are the requisites for admissibility of Note: While the evidence may not bear directly on the
evidence? issue, it will be admitted if it has the tendency to
corroborate or supplement facts established
A: previously by direct evidence, or to induce belief as to
1. Relevancy – such a relation to the fact in the probability or improbability of a fact in issue.
issue as to induce belief in its existence or
non-existence. c. MULTIPLE ADMISSIBILITY
2. Competency – if not excluded by law or by d. CONDITIONAL ADMISSIBILITY
the rules. e. CURATIVE ADMISSIBILITY
Q: What is the dotie of Fuit of the Poisoous

Tree? Q: What are the kinds of admissibility of evidence?
A: The doctrine speaks of that illegally seized A:

MULTIPLE Evidence that is plainly relevant and
documents,
evidence. Thepapers, andofthings
exclusion are inadmissible
such evidence in
is the only competent for two or more purposes
will be received if it satisfies all the
practical means of enforcing the constitutional
requirements prescribed by law in
injunction against unreasonable searches and
order that it may be admissible for
seizures. the purpose for which it is presented,
even if it does not satisfy the other
Q: What are the two axioms of admissibility requisites of admissibility for other
according to Wigmore? purposes.
CONDITIONAL Evidence appears to be immaterial is
A: admitted by the court subject to the
1. Axiom of relevancy – none but facts condition that its connection with
having rational probative value are another fact subsequent to be
admissible. proved will be established.
Otherwise, such fact already received
Note: Components of relevancy: will be stricken off the record at the
a. Materiality – whether the evidence is initiative of the adverse party.
offered upon a matter properly in CURATIVE Evidence that is otherwise improper
issue. is admitted (despite objection from
b. Probativeness – the tendency to the other party) to contradict
establish the proposition for which it is improper evidence presented or
offered as evidence. introduced by the other party, to
cure, contradict or neutralize such
2. Axiom of competency – facts having improper evidence.
rational probative value are admissible
unless some specific rule forbids their
admission. The rules of exclusion are rules
ACADEMICSCHAIR: LESTER JAY ALAN E. FLORES II
U N I V E R S I T Y O FS A N T O TOMAS
VICE CHAIRSFOR ACADEMICS: KAREN JOY G. SABUGO & JOHN HENRY C. MENDOZA
VICE CHAIR FORMANAGEMENT ANDFINANCE: JEANELLE C. LEE 295
VICE CHAIRS FORLAY-OUT AND DESIGN: EARL LOUIE M. MASACAYAN & THEENA C. MARTINEZ
Q: What are the three theories on curative 3. The combination of all the circumstances
admissibility? is such as to produce a conviction beyond
reasonable doubt (Sec. 4, Rule 133;
A: People vs Sevilleno, G.R. No. 152954,
1. American Rule – the admission of such March 11, 2004).
incompetent evidence, without objection
by the opoonent does not justify such Q: Is direct proof of previous agreement to commit
opponent in rebutting it by similar a crime necessary to prove conspiracy?
incompetent evidence
A: No. Considering the difficulty in establishing the
2. English Rule – if a party has presented existence of conspiracy, settled jurisprudence finds
inadmissible evidence, the adverse party no need to prove it by direct evidence (Fernan, Jr.
may resort to similar inadmissible and Torrevillas v. People, G.R. No. 145927, Aug. 24,
evidence 2007). It may be deduced from the acts of the

perpetrators before, during and after the
3. Massachusetts Rule – the adverse pary commission of the crime which are indicative of a
may be permitted to introduce similar common design, concerted action and concurrence
incompetent evidence In order to avoid a of sentiments (Serrano v. CA, G.R. No. 123896, June
plain and unfair prejudice cause by the 25, 2003).
adissio of the othe pats eidee.
g. POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE EVIDENCE
Q: What should determine the application of the
rule of curative admissibility? Q: What is positive and negative evidence?
A: A:
1. Whether the incompetent evidence was 1. Positive – when the witness affirms that a
seasonably objected to; and fact did or did not occur, it is entitled to
2. Whether, regardless of the objection, the greater weight since the witness
admission of such evidence shall cause a represents of his personal knowledge the
plain and unfair prejudice to the party presence or absence of a fact.
against whom it is admitted.
2. Negative – when the witness states that
f. DIRECT AND CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE he did not see or know of the occurrence
Q: Distinguish direct evidence from circumstantial of a fact and

personal there is Such
knowledge. total is
disclaimer of
admissible
evidence. only if has to contradict positive acts of
the other side or would tend to exclude
A: the existence of fact sworn to by the
DIRECT EVIDENCE CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE other side.
Establishes the Does not prove the existence
existence of a fact in of a fact in issue directly, but Note: A denial is a negative evidence. It is considered
issue without the merely provides for logical by jurisprudence to be a very weak form of defense
aid of any inference inference that such fact really and can never overcome an affirmative or positive
or presumption exists testimony particularly when it comes from the mouth
Each proof is given of facts and of a credible witness. (People vs Mendoza, 450 SCRA
The witness testifies circumstances from which the 328, January 21, 2005) .
directly of his own court may infer other
knowledge as to the connected facts which h. COMPETENT AND CREDIBLE EVIDENCE
main facts to be reasonably follow, according
proved to the common experience of Q: Distinguish competent evidence from credible
mankind evidence.
Q: When is circumstantial evidence sufficient to A:

convict the accused? COMPETENT CREDIBLE
Refers to worthiness of
A: It is sufficient for conviction if: belief (believability)
Evidence is not excluded
1. There is more than one circumstance; Note: That quality which
by the rules
2. The facts from which the inferences are renders a witness worthy of
th
derived are proven; and belief Blak’s, 5 Ed., 330)
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
7. BURDEN OF PROOF AND BURDEN OF EVIDENCE being, from introducing to the other party. It
evidence in support of relieves those favored
Q: What is burden of proof? his averment because thereby of the burden of
the presumption stands proving the fact presumed.
A: It is the duty of a party to present evidence to in the place of evidence.
establish his claim or defense by the amount of (Francisco, p. 356, 1992
evidence required by law (Sec. 1, Rule 131). It is also ed.)
called onus probandi.
Note: The burden of proof is on the party who asserts
the affirmative of the issue at the beginning of the
Q: What are the two concepts of burden of proof?
case and continues on him throughout the case. Ei
incumbit probatio qui dicit, no qui negat - he who
A:
asserts, not he who denies, must prove (Homeowners
1. Burden of going forward – Pats oligatio of Savings & Loan Bank v. Dailo, G.R. No. 153802, Mar.
producing evidence. 11, 2005).
2. Burden of persuasion – The burden of Where insanity is alleged, the burden of proof rests
persuading the trier of fact that the burdened upon him who alleges insanity to establish that fact
party is entitled to prevail. but where insanity is once proved to exist, the burden
of evidence is shifted to him who asserts that the act
Q: Distinguish burden of proof from burden of was done while the person was sane (Engle v. Doe,
evidence. (2004 Bar Question) G.R. No. L-23317, Aug. 7, 1925).
A: Q: What is the test to determine where the burden

BURDEN OF PROOF BURDEN OF EVIDENCE of proof lies?
Definition
It is the duty of a party to A: The test is to ask which party to an action or suit
provide evidence at any will fail if he offers no evidence competent to show
stage of the trial until he the facts averred as the basis for the relief he seeks
has established a prima to obtain. If the defendant has affirmative defenses,
It is the duty of a party
facie case, or the like duty he bears the burden of proof as to those defenses
to present evidence on
of the adverse party to hih he sets up i ase to the plaitiffs ause
the facts in issue
meet and overthrow that
necessary to establish of action (Bank of the Philippine Islands v. Spouses
prima facie case thus
his claim or defense by Royeca, G.R. No. 176664, July 21, 2008).
established. In both civil
the amount of evidence
and criminal cases, the
required by 131)
Rule law (Sec. 1, burden of evidence lies on Q: Who has the burden of proof?
the party who asserts an
affirmative allegation. A:
(Regalado, Vol. II, p. 817, CIVIL CASE
2008 ed.) Plaintiff Defendant
Whether it shifts throughout the proceedings To show the truth of his
Does not shift as it Shifts to the other party allegations if the If he raises an affirmative
remains throughout the when one party has defendant raises a defense.
entire case exactly produced sufficient negative defense.
where the pleadings evidence to be entitled to a CRIMINAL CASE
srcinally placed it ruling in his favor Prosecution Accused
What determines it When he admits the
Generally determined by Because of presumption offense/crime charged
Generally determined by the developments at the of innocence but raises justifying,
the pleadings filed by trial, or by the provisions of exempting circumstances,
the party; and whoever the substantive law or or absolutory causes.
asserts the affirmative of procedural rules which may
the issue has the burden relieve the party from Q: Who has the burden of evidence?
of proof presenting evidence on the
fact alleged
A:
Effect of a legal presumption
CIVIL CASE
It does not shift the It creates a prima facie Plaintiff Defendant
burden of proof. case and thereby sustains
Has to prove the
However, the one who the said burden of Has to prove his
affirmative allegations in
has the burden of proof evidence on the point affirmative allegations in
his counterclaim and his
is relieved from the time which it covers, shifting it the complaint
affirmative defenses
CRIMINAL CASE aditted the killig. (Cabuslay v. People and

Prosecution Accused Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 129875, Sept. 30, 2005).
Has to prove its
Has to prove his
affirmative allegations in Q: What is the Principle of Negative Averments?
affirmative allegations
the Information
regarding the existence
regarding the elements A:
of justifying, exempting,
of the crime as well as GR: Negative allegations need not be proved,
absolutory, or mitigating
the attendant whether in civil or criminal cases.
circumstances
circumstances
XPN: Where such negative allegations are
Q: What are the degrees of proof necessary to essential parts of the cause of action or defense
satisfy the burden of proof? in a civil case, or are essential ingredients of the
offense in a criminal case or the defenses
A:
1. Civil case – Preponderance of evidence thereto, negative allegations should be proved.
(Industrial Finance Corp., v.Tobias, G.R. No. L-
2. Administrative case – Substantial 41555, July 27, 1977)
evidence
3. Criminal case: XPN to the XPN:In civil cases, even if the
a. During preliminary investigation – negative allegation is an essential part of the
Well founded belief of the fact of cause of action or defense, it does not have to
commission of a crime be proved if it is only for the purpose of denying
b. Issuance of warrant of arrest – the existence of a document which should
Probable cause properly be in the custody of the adverse party.
c. To convict an accused – Evidence of (Regalado, Vol. II, p. 818, 2008 ed.)
guilt beyond reasonable doubt
d. Accused claims justifying/exempting 8. PRESUMPTIONS
circumstances – Clear and convincing
evidence Q: What are matters which need not be proved?
Q: Who has the burden of proof if the accused A:

seeks dismissal under the Speedy Trial Act? 1. Facts admitted or not denied provided they
have been sufficiently alleged (Sec. 11,
A: If the accused is not brought to trial within the
Rule 8);
time required, the Information shall be dismissed
upon motion of the accused. In such a case, the 2. Agreed
129); and admitted facts
(Sec. 4, Rule
burden of proof of supporting his motion is with the 3. Facts subject to judicial notice (Sec. 3,
accused (Sec. 13, R.A. 8493). Rule 129); and
4. Facts legally presumed(Secs. 2 & 3, Rule
Q: Who has the burden of proof in self-defense?
131).
A: One who invokes self-defense admits Q: What is presumption?

responsibility for the killing. Accordingly, the
burden of proof shifts to the accused who must A: It is an assumption of fact resulting from a rule of
then prove the justifying circumstance. He must law, which requires such fact to be assumed from
show by clear and convincing evidence that he another fact or group of facts found or otherwise
indeed acted in self-defense, or in defense of a th
established in the action ( Blak’s, 5 Ed., 1067 citing
relative or a stranger. Self-defense, like alibi, is a Uniform Rule 12; NJ evidence Rule 13). It is an
defense which can easily be concocted. inference of the existence or non-existence of a fact
which courts are permitted to draw from the proof
It is well-settled in this jurisdiction that once an of other facts. (In the matter of the Intestate Estates
accused has admitted that he inflicted the fatal of Delgado and Rustia, G.R. No. 175733, Jan. 27,
injuries on the deceased, it is incumbent upon him 2006)
in order to avoid criminal liability, to prove the
justifying circumstance claimed by him with clear, Note: A presumption shifts the burden of going
satisfactory and convincing evidence. He cannot forward with the evidence. It imposes on the party
rely on the weakness of the prosecution but on the against whom it is directed the burden of going
strength of his o eidee, fo ee if the forward with evidence to meet or rebut the
evidence of the prosecution were weak it could not presumption.
be disbelieved after the accused himself had
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
Q: Distinguish the classes of presumptions. in derogation of the deed, or from denying

the truth of any material fact asserted in the
A: deed e.g. The tenant is not permitted to
PRESUMPTION OF FACT deny the title of his landlord at the time of
PRESUMPTION OF LAW
(Praesumptiones the commencement of the relation of
(Praesumptiones Juris)
Hominis) landlord and tenant between them [Sec. 2
It is a deduction which (par. b)]
It is a deduction which
reason draws from the
the law expressly directs
facts proved without an Note: Estoppel may attach even though the landlord
to be made from
express direction from does not have title at the commencement of the
particular facts.
law to that effect. relations. It may inure in favor of the successor.
A certain inference must
be made whenever the Discretion is vested in the If the title asserted is one that is alleged to have been
facts appear which tribunal as to drawing the
furnish the basis of the inference acquired subsequent
relation, the to the
presumption commencement
will not apply. of that
inference
Derived wholly and Q: What are the requisites for a party to be
directly from the estopped?
Reduced to fixed rules
circumstances of the
and form a part of the
particular case by means
system of jurisprudence A:
of the common
1. Conduct amounting to false representation
experience of mankind
or concealment of material facts; or at least
Need not be pleaded or
proved if the facts on calculated to convey the impression that the
Has to be pleaded and facts are otherwise than, and inconsistent
which they are based are
proved with, those which the party subsequently
duly averred and
established attempts to assert;
2. Intent, or at least, expectation, that this
Q: What are the kinds of presumptions of law? conduct shall be acted upon by, or at least
influence, the other party; and
A: 3. Knowledge, actual or constructive, of the
1. Conclusive presumptions (presumptions juris real facts. (Riano, Evidence: A Restatement
et de jure) for the Bar, p. 431, 2009 ed.)
2. Disputable presumptions (presumptions juris
Q: What are the requisites before estoppel can be
tantum) claimed?
a. CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTIONS
A:
Q: What is a conclusive presumption? 1. Lack of knowledge and of the means of
knowledge of the truth as to the facts in
A: Conclusive presumptions are those which are not question;
permitted to be overcome by any proof to the 2. Reliance, in good faith, upon the conduct or
contrary. statements of the party to be estopped; and
3. Action or inaction based thereon of such
Q: What are the classes of conclusive character as to change the position or status
presumptions? of the party claiming the estoppel, to his
injury, detriment or prejudice. (Kalalo v. Luz,
A: G.R. No. L-27782, July 31, 1970)
1. Estoppel in pais – Whenever a party has, by
his own declaration, act or omission, b. DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTIONS
intentionally and deliberately led another to
believe a particular thing to be true, and to Q: What are disputable presumptions?
act upon such belief, he cannot, in any
litigation arising out of such declaration, act A: Those which are satisfactory if uncontradicted,
or omission, be permitted to falsify it [Sec. 2, but may be contradicted and overcome by other
(par. a)]. evidence. (Sec. 3, Rule 131)
2. Estoppel by deed – A party to a property

deed is precluded from asserting, as against
another party to the deed, any right or title
Q: What are the disputable presumptions under the latter.

Section 3 of Rule 130?
8. Obligation delivered up to the debtor has been
A: paid.
1. A person is innocent of a crime or wrong.
9. Prior rents or installments had been paid when
Note: It applies to both civil and criminal cases. a receipt for the later ones is produced.
Presumption of innocence of the accused
accompanies him until the rendition of 10. A person found in possession of a thing taken
judgement and disappears after conviction, such in the doing of a recent wrongful act is the
that upon appeal, the appellate court will then taker and doer of the whole act; otherwise,
presume the guilt of the accused. that things which a person possesses or
exercises acts of ownership over, are owned
2. Unlawful act is done with an unlawful intent.
by him.
Note: Presumption of possession of stolen goods
3. Person intends the ordinary consequences of arises once the prosecution is able to prove that a
his voluntary act. certain object has been unlawfully taken, and
that the accused is in possession of the object
4. Person takes ordinary care of his concerns. unlawfully taken. Presumption of innocence
Note: All people are sane and normal and moved disappears and presumption of guilt takes place.
by substantially the same motives. When of age
and sane, they must take care of themselves. 11. Person in possession of an order on himself for
Courts operate not because one person has been the payment of the money or the delivery of
defeated or overcome by another but because anything has paid the money or delivered the
that person has been defeated or overcome thing accordingly.
illegally. There must be a violation of the law
(Vales v. Villa, G.R. No. 10028, Dec. 16, 1916).
12. Person acting in public office was regularly
appointed or elected to it.
5. Evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse
if produced. Ratio: It would cause great inconvenience if in
the first instance strict proof were required of
The requisites for the presumption to apply appointment or election to office in all cases
are: where it might be collaterally in issue.
a. The evidence is material;
b. The party had the opportunity to produce 13. Official duty has been regularly performed.
it; and Note: All things are presumed to have been done
c. The evidence is available only to the said regularly and with due formality until the
party. contrary is proved (Omnia praesumuntur rite et
solemniter esse acta donec probetur in
The presumption will not be applicable when: contrarium). An adverse presumption may arise
a. Suppression of evidence is not willful; where the official act in question appears
b. Evidence suppressed or withheld is irregular on its face. This presumption extends to
merely corroborative or cumulative; persons who have been appointed pursuant to a
c. Evidence is at the disposal of both parties; local or special statute to act in quasi-public or
and quasi-official capacities and to professionals like
lawyers and surgeons.
d. Suppression is by virtue of an exercise of
privilege.
Ratio:
a. Innocence and not wrongdoing is to be
Note: Failure of the prosecution to present a
presumed;
certain witness and to proffer a plausible
b. An official oath will not be violated; and
explanation does not amount to willful
suppression of evidence since the prosecutor has
c. A republican form of government cannot
survive long unless a limit is placed upon
the discretion/prerogative to determine the
controversies and certain trust and
witnesses he is going to present (People v.
confidence reposed in each governmental
Jalbuena, G.R. No. 171163, July 4, 2007).
department or agent at least to the extent
of such presumption.
6. Money paid by one to another was due to the
latter.
GR: Presumption applies to both civil as well as
criminal cases.
7. Thing delivered by one to another belonged to
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
absence of 10 years is required; and if he

XPN: Petition for writ of amparo – disappeared after the age of 75, absence of
presumption may not be invoked by the only 5 years is sufficient. The following shall be
respondent public officer or employee (Rule on considered dead for all purposes including the
the Writ of Amparo, A.M. No. 17-9-12-SC). division of estate among the heirs:
14. A court or judge acting as such, whether in the a. Person on board a vessel lost during a sea
Philippines or elsewhere, was acting in the voyage, or an aircraft which is missing,
lawful exercise of jurisdiction. who has not been heard of for 4 years
Note: Lawful exercise of jurisdiction is presumed since the loss of the vessel or aircraft;
in all cases, be it superior or inferior courts, b. Member of the armed forces who has
whether in the Philippines or elsewhere, unless taken part in armed hostilities, and has
the record itself shows that jurisdiction has not been missing for 4 years;
been acquired
absence or the in
of jurisdiction, record
whichitself shows the
case jurisdiction c. Person who has been in danger of death
under other circumstances and whose
to render a judgment may not be presumed.
existence has not been known for 4 years;
d. If a married person has been absent for 4
15. All the matters within an issue raised in a case consecutive years, the spouse present
were laid before the court and passed upon by may contract a subsequent marriage if he
it; all matters within an issue raised in a or she has well-founded belief that the
dispute submitted for arbitration were laid absent spouse is already dead; 2 years in
before arbitrators and passed upon by them. case of disappearance where there is
danger of death under the circumstances
16. Private transactions have been fair and hereinabove provided. Before marrying
regular. again, the spouse present must institute a
Note: Presumption that all men act fairly,
summary proceeding as provided in the
honestly and in good faith, and that an individual
Family Code and in the rules for
intends to do right rather than wrong and intends
to do only what he has the right to do. declaration of presumptive death of the
absentee, without prejudice to the effect
17. Ordinary course of business has been followed. of re-appearance of the absent spouse.
Note: Persons engaged in a given trade or
business are presumed to be acquainted with the 24. Acquiescence resulted from a belief that the
general customs, usages and other facts thing acquiesced in was conformable to the
necessarily incident to the proper conduct of the law or fact.

business.
25. Things have happened according to the
18. There was a sufficient consideration for a ordinary course of nature and ordinary habits
contract. of life.
19. Negotiable instrument was given or indorsed 26. Persons acting as co-partners have entered
for a sufficient consideration. into a contract of co-partnership.
20. An endorsement of negotiable instrument was 27. A man and woman deporting themselves as
made before the instrument was overdue and husband and wife have entered into a lawful
at the place where the instrument is dated. contract of marriage.
21. A writing is truly dated. 28. Property acquired by a man and a woman who
are capacitated to marry each other and who
22. Letter duly directed and mailed was received in live exclusively with each other as husband
the regular course of the mail. and wife without the benefit of marriage or
Note: For this presumption to arise, it must be under void marriage, has been obtained by
proved that the letter was properly addressed their joint efforts, work or industry.
with postage pre-paid and that it was actually
mailed. 29. In cases of cohabitation by a man and a
woman who are not capacitated to marry each
23. Absentee of 7 years, it being not known other and who have acquired properly through
whether or not he is still alive, is considered their actual joint contribution of money,
dead for all purposes except for succession . property or industry, such contributions and
For the purpose of opening his succession, an
their corresponding shares including joint marriage.

deposits of money and evidences of credit are b. A child born after 180 days following the
equal. subsequent marriage is considered to have
been conceived during the subsequent
30. If the marriage is terminated and the mother marriage, even though it be born within the
contracted another marriage within 300 300 days after the termination of the former
hundred days after such termination of the marriage.
former marriage, these rules shall govern in
the absence of proof to the contrary: Note: There is no presumption of legitimacy or
illegitimacy when a child is born after 300 days
Presumptions of paternity: following dissolution of marriage or the
a. A child born before 180 days after the separation of the spouses. Whoever alleges the
subsequent marriage is conceived during the legitimacy or illegitimacy of such child must prove
his allegation (Sec. 4).
former marriage, provided it is born within 300
days after the termination of the former
no presumption
subsequent marriage 300 days after

termination of termination of 1st 180 days after the
1st marriage marriage subsequent marriage
no presumption of
legitimacy or illigitimacy
conceived during the
subsequent marriage
conceived during the
former marriage
termination of subsequent marriage 180 days after the 300 days after termination of 1st
1st marriage subsequent marriage marriage
31. A thing once proved to exist continues as long such person or his successor in interest.
as is usual with things of that nature. 36. Except for purposes of succession, when 2
persons perish in the same calamity, and it is
32. The law has been obeyed. not shown who died first, and there are no
particular circumstances from which it can be
33. A printed or published book, purporting to be inferred, the survivorship is determined from
printed or published by public authority, was so the probabilities resulting from the strength
printed or published. and age of the sexes, according to the
following rules:
34. A printed or published book, purporting to
contain reports of cases adjudged in tribunals Presumed To
First Person Second Person
of the country where the book is published, Have Survived
contains correct reports of such cases.
< 15 yrs old < 15 yrs old older
35. A trustee or other person whose duty it was to
convey real property to a particular person has > 60 yrs old > 60 yrs old younger
actually conveyed it to him when such
< 15 > 60 yrs old < 15
presumption is necessary to perfect the title of
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
>15 and < 60 >15 and < 60

The male
male female A: The doctrine refers to a situation where the
evidence of the parties are evenly balanced or there
>15 and < 60 >15 and < 60 is doubt on which side the evidence preponderates.
The older
female female In such case the decision should be against the
party with the burden of proof (Marubeni Corp. v.
The one
Lirag, G.R. No. 130998, Aug. 10, 2001).
< 15 or > 60 15-60 between those
ages
Burden of proof is the duty of a party to present
evidence on the facts in issue necessary to establish
his claim or defense by the amount of evidence
37. That if there is a doubt, as between two or
required by law (Sec. 1, Rule 131).
more persons who are called to succeed each
other, as to which of them died first, whoever
alleges the death of one prior to the other, The Constitution provides that no person shall be
deprived of life, liberty or property without due
shall prove the same; in the absence of proof,
process of law, nor shall any person be denied the
they shall be considered to have died at the
equal protection of the law (Sec. 1, Art. Ill). In a
same time. (Sec. 3).
criminal case, its constitutional basis is the pre-
sumption of innocence and the requirement of
9. LIBERAL CONSTRUCTION OF THE RULES OF
proof beyond reasonable doubt for conviction.
EVIDENCE
(1995 Bar Question)
Q: How are the rules on evidence construed?
In criminal cases, the equipoise rule provides that
where the evidence is evenly balanced, the
A: The rules of evidence must be liberally
constitutional presumption of innocence tilts the
construed. (Section 6, Rule 1) The Rules of
scales in favor of the accused. (Malana v. People,
Procedure are mere tools intended to facilitate
G.R. No. 173612, Mar. 26, 2008)
rather than to frustrate the attainment of justice. A
strict and rigid application of the rules must always
Q: What is the hierarchy of quantum of evidence?
be eschewed if it would subvert their primary
objective of enhancing substantial justice.
A:
Procedural rules myst be liberally interpreted and
applied so as not to frustrate substantial justice
(Quiambao vs. Court of Appeals, 454 SCRA 17,
March 28, 2005). However, to justify relaxation of
the rules, a satisfactory explanation and a
subsequent fulfillment of the requirements have
always been required (Barcenas vs Tomas, 454
SCRA 593, March 31, 2005).
10. QUANTUM OF EVIDENCE (WEIGHT AND

SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE) (RULE 133)
Q: Define weight of evidence.
A: It is the probative value given by the court to

particular evidence admitted to prove a fact in
issue.
Q: When is evidence credible?
A: It is credible if it is admissible and believable and

worthy of belief, such that it can be used by the
courts in deciding a case.
Q: Explain the Equipoise Doctrine in the law of evi-
dence and cite its constitutional and procedural Note: Evidence, to be worthy of credit, must not only
bases. proceed from a credible source but must also be

credible in itself. It must be natural, reasonable and

probable as to make it easy to believe (People v. A:
Peruelo, G.R. No. 50631, June 29, 1981). 1. Where the identity of the assailant is in
question;
Q: Distinguish positive testimony from negative 2. To determine the voluntariness of the
testimony. criminal act or the sanity of the accused;
3. To determine from which side the unlawful
A: aggression commenced, as where the
POSITIVE TESTIMONY NEGATIVE TESTIMONY accused invoked self-defense wherein
unlawful aggression on the part of his
Affirms that a fact did or opponent is an essential element;
did not occur. When a witness states
4. To determine the specific nature of the
that he did not see or
crime committed;
Entitled to greater weight know the occurrence of a
since the witness fact. 5. To determine whether a shooting was
represents his personal intentional or accidental, the fact that the
knowledge of the There is a total disclaimer accused had personal motives to shoot the
presence or absence of a of personal knowledge, victim being weighty; and
fact. hence without any 6. Where the accused contends that he acted
representation or in defense of a stranger, since it is essential,
When a witness declares disavowal that the fact in for such defense to prosper, that the
of his own knowledge question could or could accused was not induced by revenge,
that a fact did not take not have existed or resentment or other evil motive. (Regalado,
place, it is an affirmation happened. Vol. II, pp. 893-894, 2008 ed.)
of a positive testimony.
Q: What isalibi?
Note: Mere denial, if unsubstantiated by clear and
convincing evidence, has no weight in law and cannot A: It is a defense where an accused claims that he
be given greater evidentiary value than the positive was somewhere else at the time of the commission
testimony of the complaining witness. Denial is of the offense. It is one of the weakest defenses an
intrinsically weak, being a negative and self-serving
accused may avail because of the facility with which
assertion (People v. Rodas, G.R. No. 175881, Aug. 28,
it can be fabricated, just like a mere denial (People
2007).
v. Esperanza, G.R. Nos. 139217-24, June 27, 2003).
A categorical and positive identification of an
Q: What are the guidelines in the assessment of
credibility of a witness? accused, without any showing of ill-motive on the
part of the eyewitness testifying on the matter,
A:
prevails over an alibi (People v. Gingos and
1. A witness who testified in clear, positive Margote, G.R. No. 176632, Sept. 11, 2007). When
and convincing manner and remained this is the defense of the accused, it must be
consistent in cross-examination is a established by positive, clear and satisfactory
credible witness (People v. Comanda, G.R. evidence.
No. 175880, July 6, 2007); and
Note: For the defense of alibi to prosper, the accused
2. Findings of fact and assessment of
must show that:
credibility of a witness are matters best
1. He was somewhere else; and
left to the trial court that had the front- 2. It was physically impossible for him to be at
line opportunity to personally evaluate the scene of the crime at the time of its
the demeanor, conduct, and behavior of commission. (People v. Gerones, et.al., G.R.
the witness while testifying (Sps. Paragas No. L-6595, Oct. 29, 1954)
v. Heirs of Balacano, G.R. No. 168220,
Aug. 31, 2005). Q: What is Out-of-Court Identification?
Q: What is motive? A: It is a means of identifying a suspect of a crime

and is done thru:
A: It is the moving power which impels one to 1. Show-ups: where the suspect alone is
action for a definite result (The Revised Penal Code brought face to face with the witness for
[Book One] by L. Reyes, p.57, 2001 ed.). identification;
2. Mug shots: where photographs are shown
Q: When is evidence of motive relevant? to the witness to identify the suspect; or
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
3. Line-ups: where a witness identifies the matters is not the number of witnesses but the
suspect from a group of persons lined up for credibility and the nature and quality of their
the purpose. (People v. Claudio Teehankee, testimonies. The testimony of a lone witness is
Jr., G.R. Nos. 111206-08, Oct. 6, 1995) sufficient to support a conviction if found positive
and credible (Ceniza-Manantan v. People, G.R. No.
Q: What is the relevance of an eyewitness 156248, Aug. 28, 2007).
identification?
Q: Defineres ipsa loquitur
.
A: It is often decisive of the conviction or acquittal
of an accused. Identification of an accused through A: It literally means the thing speaks for itself. This
mug shots is one of the established procedures in doctrine provides that the fact of the occurrence of
pinning down criminals. However, to avoid charges an injury, taken with the surrounding
of impermissible suggestion, there should be circumstances, may permit an inference or raise a
nothing in the photograph that would focus presumption of negligence, or make out a plaintiff's
attention on a single person (People v. Villena, G.R. prima facie case, and present a question of fact for
No. 140066, Oct. 14, 2002). defendant to meet with an explanation. Where the
thing which caused the injury complained of is
Q: Is a police line-up mandatory to prove the shown to be under the management of the
identity of an offender? defendant or his servants and the accident is such
as in ordinary course of things does not happen if
A: A police line-up is merely a part of the those who have its management or control use
investigation process by police investigators to proper care, it affords reasonable evidence, in the
ascertain the identity of offenders or confirm their absence of explanation by the defendant, that the
identification by a witness to the crime. Police accident arose from or was caused by the
officers are not obliged to assemble a police line-up defendant's want of care (Ramos v. CA, G.R. No.
as a condition sine qua non to prove the identity of 124354, Dec. 29, 1999).
an offender. If on the basis of the evidence on
hand, police officers are certain of the identity of Q: What are the requisites in applying the doctrine
the offender, they need not require any police line- of res ipsa loquitur
?
up anymore (Tapdasan, Jr. v. People, G.R. No.
141344, Nov. 21, 2002). A:
1. The occurrence of an injury;
-of-out idetifiatioadmissible
Q: Whe is out 2. The thing which caused the injury was under
and reliable? the control and management of the

defendant;
A: It is admissible and reliable when it satisfies the 3. The occurrence was such that in the
totalit of iustaes test. Ude the totalit ordinary course of things, would not have
of irustaes test, the following factors are happened if those who had control or
considered: management used proper care; and
1. Witess oppotuit to ie the iial 4. The absence of explanation by the
at the time of the crime; defendant (Professional Services, Inc. v.
2. Witess degee of attetio at that tie; Agana, G.R. No. 126297, Jan. 31, 2007).
3. Accuracy of any prior description given by
the witness; Q: Does the application of the doctrine dispense
4. Level of certainty demonstrated by the with the requirement of proof of negligence?
witness at the identification;
5. Length of time between the crime and the A: No. It is considered merely as evidentiary or in
identification; and the nature of procedural rule. It is simply in the
6. Suggestiveness of the identification process of such proof, permitting the plaintiff to
procedure. (People v. Claudio Teehankee, present enough of the attending circumstances to
Jr., G.R. Nos. 111206-08, Oct. 6, 1995) invoke the doctrine, creating an inference or
presumption of negligence and thereby place on
Q: Is the testimony of only one witness sufficient the defendant the burden of going forward with the
to convict the accused? proof to the contrary. (Ramos, et. al. v. CA, G.R. No.
124354, Dec. 29, 1999)
A: Yes. Truth is established not by the number of
witnesses but by the quality of their testimonies. In
determining the sufficiency of evidence, what

was raped and consequently subject herself to an

Q: What is the Rule on Partial Credibility of a examination of her private parts, undergo the
witness? trauma and humiliation of a public trial, and
embarrass herself with the need to narrate in detail
A: The testimony of a witness may be believed in how she was raped, if she was not raped at all. This
part and disbelieved in another part, depending on ruling especially holds true where the complainant
the probabilities and improbabilities of the case is a minor, whose testimony deserves full credence.
(People v. Tan, G.R. No. 176526, Aug. 8, 2007). (People v. Esperanza, G.R. Nos. 139217-24, June 27,
2003).
Note: If the testimony of the witness on a material
issue is willfully false and given with an intention to Q: What is the Sweetheart Theory?
deeie, the out a disegad all the itess
testimony. Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus (False in A: It is an admission by the accused of sexual
one thing, false in everything). intercourse with the victim but argues that they
were lovers and the act is consensual and
Note: This is not a mandatory rule of evidence but is consequently places on the accused the burden of
applied by the courts in its discretion. It deals only with proving the supposed relationship by substantial
the weight of evidence and not a positive rule of law. evidence. To be worthy of judicial acceptance, such
The itesses false o eaggeated stateets o defense should be supported by documentary,
other matters shall not preclude the acceptance of testimonial, or other evidence. Corroborative proof
such evidence as is relieved from any sign of like notes, pictures or tokens that such a
falsehood. The court may accept and reject portions of
relationship had really existed must be presented
the itess testio depedig o the iheet
(People v. Hapin, G.R. No.175782, Aug. 24, 2007).
credibility thereof. (Regalado, Vol. II, p. 883, 2008 ed.)
Q: Is extrajudicial confession a sufficient ground
Q: Ma the tial out’s fidigs asto the
for conviction?
credibility of witnesses be disturbed on appeal?
A: It is not sufficient ground for conviction unless

A: The tial outs fidigs of fat ill ot e
corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti. (Sec. 3)
disturbed on appeal, unless there is a clear showing
that it plainly overlooked matters of substance
Q: What iscorpus delicti?
which, if considered, might affect the results of the
review. The credibility of witnesses is best
A: It is the actual commission by someone of the
determined by the trial judge, who has the direct
opportunity to observe and evaluate their particular
commission crime charged.
of the crime,Itnot
refers to the
to the fact ofbody
physical the
demeanor on the witness stand. (People v.
of the deceased or to the ashes of a burned
Pacuancuan, G.R. No. 144589, June 16, 2003).
building. The corpus delicti may be proven by the
credible testimony of a sole witness, not necessarily
Q: May the uncorroborated testimony of an
by physical evidence (Rimorin v. People, G.R. No.
accused who turned into a State witness suffice to
146481, Apr. 30, 2003).
convict his co-accused?
Q: What are the elements of corpus delicti?

A: Yes. It may suffice to convict his co-accused if it is
given unhesitatingly and in a straightforward
A:
manner and is full of details which by their nature
1. Proof of the occurrence of a certain
could not have been the result of deliberate
event; and
afterthought, otherwise, it needs corroboration, the
2. A pesos iial esposiilit fo the
presence or lack of which may ultimately decide the
act (People v. Corpuz, G.R. No. 148919,
case of the prosecution and the fate of the accused
Dec. 17, 2002).
(People v. Sunga, G.R. No. 126029, Mar. 27, 2003).
Note: The identity of the accused is not a necessary
element of the corpus delicti .
Q: May the testimony alone of the complaining
party in a rape case sufficient to convict the
Q: What are the elements of illegal possession of
accused?
firearm which constitute the ?
corpus delicti
A: Yes. In rape cases, the lone testimony of the

A:
offended party, if free from serious and material 1. The existence of the firearm; and
contradictions, is sufficient to sustain a verdict of 2. That it has been actually held with animus
conviction. No woman would openly admit that she possidendi by the accused without the
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
corresponding license therefor. (People v. 6. Their personal credibility so far as the same
Solayao, G.R. No. 119220, Sept. 20, 1996) may legitimately appear upon the trial; or
7. The number of witnesses, though the
a. PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT preponderance is not necessarily with the
greater number (Sec. 1, Rule 133).
Q: What is meant by reasonable doubt?
c. SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
A: It is that state of the case which, after the entire
comparison and consideration of all the evidence Q: What is substantial evidence?
leaves the mind of the judge in that condition that
he cannot say that he feels an abiding conviction to A: It is that amount of relevant evidence which a
a moral certainty of the truth of the charge. (People reasonable mind might accept as adequate to
v. Calma, G.R. No. 127126, Sept. 17, 1998) justify a conclusion. (Sec. 5)
Q: What does proof beyond reasonable doubt Q: When is substantial evidence sufficient to
require? establish a fact?
A: It only requires moral certainty or that degree of A: In cases filed before administrative or quasi-
proof which produces conviction in an unprejudiced judicial bodies, a fact may be deemed established if
mind. It does not mean such degree of proof as it is supported by substantial evidence.
excluding the possibility of error, produce absolute
certainty. (Basilio v. People, G.R. No. 180597, Nov. d. CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE
7, 2008)
Q: What are the instances when clear and
Q: Must the identity of the accused be proved convincing evidence is required as quantum of
beyond reasonable doubt? proof?
A: Yes. When the identity of the accused is not A:

established beyond reasonable doubt, acquittal 1. Granting or denial of bail in extradition
necessarily follows. Conviction for a crime rests on proceedings (Government of Hong Kong
the stegth of the poseutios eidee, ee Special Administrative Region v. Olalia, Jr.,
on the weakness of that of the defense. G.R. No. 153675, April 19, 2005);
2. When proving a charge of bias and partiality
Note: In every
must prove two criminal
things: prosecution, the prosecution against a judge (Rivera v. Mendoza, A.M.
No. RTJ-06-2013, Aug. 4, 2006);
1. The commission of the crime; and 3. GR: When proving fraud (Alonso v. Cebu
2. The identification of the accused as the Country Club, Inc., G.R. No. 130876, Dec. 5,
perpetrator of the crime. What is needed is 2003)
positive identification made with moral certainty XPN: Under Art. 1387 of the New Civil Code,
as to the person of the offender (People v. certain alienations of property are
Maguing, G.R. No. 144090, June 26, 2003).
presumed fraudulent.
4. When proving forgery (Citibank, N.A. v.
b. PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE
Sabeniano, G.R. No. 156132, Feb. 6, 2007);
5. When proving ownership over a land in
Q: What are the matters that must be taken into
annulment or reconveyance of title
consideration in determining where the
(Manotok Realty, Inc. v. CLT Realty
preponderance of evidence lies?
Development Corp., G.R. No. 123346, Dec.
14, 2007);
A:
6. When invoking self-defense, the onus is on
1. All the facts and circumstances of the case;
the accused-appellant to establish by clear
2. The itesses ae of testifig, thei
and convincing evidence his justification for
intelligence, their means and opportunity of the killing (People v. Tomolin, G.R. No.
knowing the facts to which there are
126650, July 28, 1999);
testifying;
7. When proving the allegation of frame-up
3. The nature of the facts to which they and extortion by police officers in most
testify;
dangerous drug cases (People v. Boco, G.R.
4. The probability or improbability of their
No. 129676, June 23, 1999);
testimony;
5. Their interest or want of interest;
8. When proving physical impossibility for the personal knowledge of the court; rather, it is the
accused to be at the crime scene when ogizae of oo koledge. Judiial otie
using alibi as a defense (People v. Cacayan, relieves the parties from the necessity of introducing
G.R. No.180499, July 9, 2008); evidence to prove the fact notified. It makes evidence
9. When using denial as a defense like in unnecessary.
prosecution for violation of the Dangerous
Drugs Act (People v. Mustapa, G.R. No. Q: What are the requisites of judicial notice?
141244, Feb. 19, 2001);
10. To overcome the presumption of due A:
execution of notarized instruments (Viaje v. 1. The matter must be one of common and
Pamintel, G.R. No. 147792, Jan. 23, 2006); general knowledge;
11. When proving bad faith to warrant an 2. It must be well and authoritatively settled
award of moral damages (Resolution of the and not doubtful or uncertain; and
SC in Cual v. Leonis Navigation, G.R. No. 3. It must be dispute

reasonable one which is itnot
in that subject to a
is either:
167775, Oct. 10, 2005);
12. When proving that the police officers did a. Generally known within the territorial
not properly perform their duty or that they jurisdiction of the trial court; or
were inspired by an improper motive b. Capable of accurate and ready
(People v. Concepcion, G.R. No. 178876, determination by resorting to sources
June 27, 2008); or whose accuracy cannot reasonably be
13. When a person seeks confirmation of an questionable (Expertravel & Tours, Inc.
imperfect or incomplete title to a piece of v. CA, G.R. No. 152392, May 26, 2005).
land on the basis of possession by himself Note: The principal guide in determining what facts
and his predecessors-in-interest, he must may be assumed to be judicially known is that of
notoriety (Ibid.). The test of notoriety is whether the
prove with clear and convincing evidence
fact involved is so notoriously known as to make it
compliance with the requirements of the
proper to assume its existence without proof.
applicable law. (Republic v. Imperial Credit
Corp., G.R. No. 173088, June 25, 2008) (List
Q: Whe is a atte osideed oo
of cases: Riano, Evidence: A Restatement for
koledge?
the Bar, pp. 422-426, 2009 ed.)
A: They are those matters coming to the knowledge
B. JUDICIAL NOTICE AND JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS
of men generally in the course of ordinary
1. WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED
experiences of life, or they may be matters which
Q: What are the facts that need not be proved? are generally accepted by mankind as true and are
capable of ready and unquestioned demonstration.
A:
Note: Thus, facts which are universally known, and
1. Those which the courts may take judicial which may be found in encyclopedias, dictionaries or
notice (Rule 129); other publications, are judicially noticed, provided,
2. Those that are judicially admitted (Rule they are of such universal notoriety and so generally
129); understood that they may be regarded as forming part
3. Those that are conclusively presumed (Rule of the common knowledge of every person. A court
131); and however cannot take judicial notice of any fact which,
4. Those that are disputably presumed but in part, is dependent on the existence or non-existence
uncontradicted (Rule 131). of a fact of which the court has no constructive
knowledge (Expertravel & Tours, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No.
2. MATTERS OF JUDICIAL NOTICE 152392, May 26, 2005) .
Q: What is judicial notice? Q: In discretionary judicial notice, when is

hearing necessary?
A: It is the cognizance of certain facts which judges
may properly take and act upon without proof A:
because they are supposed to be known to them. It AFTER TRIAL BUT BEFORE
is based on considerations of expediency and DURING TRIAL JUDGMENT OR ON
convenience. It displaces evidence, being APPEAL
equivalent to proof. The court on its own The proper court, on its
Note: Judicial notice fulfils the objective which the initiative, or on request own initiative or on
evidence intends to achieve. It is not equivalent to of a party, may request of a party, may
judicial knowledge or that which is based on the announce its intention take judicial notice of any
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
to take judicial notice of matter and allow the 3. It can be verbal or written admission. There
any matter and allow parties to be heard is no particular form required.
the parties to be heard thereon if such matter is
thereon (Sec. 3). decisive of a material issue Q: Distinguish judicial admission from extrajudicial
in the case. admission.
Note: Hearing is necessary in the foregoing instances A:

to afford the parties reasonable opportunity to present EXTRAJUDICIAL
information relevant to the propriety of taking such JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS
ADMISSIONS
judicial notice or the tenor of the matter to be Those made out of
judicially noticed.
Those made in the course court or in a judicial
of the proceeding in the proceeding other than
a. MANDATORY same case the one under
Q: What is mandatory notice? Do not require proof and consideration

Regarded as evidence
may be contradicted only
and must be offered as
A: If the fact sought to be proved are: by showing that it was
such, otherwise the
1. Existence and territorial extent of States; made through palpable
court will not consider it
2. Political history, forms of government and mistake or that no such
in deciding the case.
symbols of nationality; admission was made.
3. Law of nations; Judicial admissions need
4. Admiralty and maritime courts of the world not be offered in evidence
and their seals; since it is not evidence. It Requires formal offer
5. Political constitution and history of the is superior to evidence and for it to be considered
Philippines; shall be considered by the
court as established.
6. Official acts of legislative, executive and
Conclusive upon the
judicial departments of the Philippines; Rebuttable
admitter
7. Laws of nature;
Admissible even if self- Not admissible if self-
8. Measure of time; and
serving serving
9. Geographical divisions (Sec. 1). Subject to cross- Not subject to cross-
examination examination
b. DISCRETIONARY
Q: When are judicial admissions made?
Q: What is discretionary notice?
A: It may be made by the party himself or by his
A: Discretionary – a court may take judicial notice of counsel:
matters which are: 1. In the pleadings filed by the parties;
1. Of public knowledge; 2. In the course of the trial either by verbal or
2. Capable of unquestionable demonstration; written manifestations or stipulations,
or including depositions, written
3. Ought to be known to judges because of interrogatories and requests for admissions;
their judicial functions (Sec. 2). or
3. In other stages of the judicial proceedings,
3. JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS as in pre-trial.
Q: What is judicial admission? Q: What remedy is available to a party who gave a

judicial admission?
A: It is an admission, verbal or written, made by a
party in the course of the proceedings in the same A:
case, which does not require proof (Sec. 4). 1. Written admission – File a motion to
withdraw such pleading, or any other
Q: What are the elements of judicial admission? written instrument containing such
admission.
A: 2. Oral admission – The counsel may move for
1. It must be made by a party to the case or the exclusion of such admission.
his counsel;
2. It must be made in the course of the
proceedings in the same case; and

Q: What are the rules on admissions made in A: Yes. Admissions made in the pre-trial are
pleadings? deemed judicial admissions because they are made
in the course of the proceedings of the case. (Riano,
A: Evidence: A Restatement for the Bar, p. 104, 2009
GR: The fats alleged i a pats pleadigs ae ed.)
deemed admissions and are binding upon that
party. a. EFFECT OF JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS
XPN: Hypothetical admissions made by party Q: What are the consequences of judicial
litigant, as when a defendant moves to dismiss admissions?
the case based on lack of jurisdiction or sets up
affirmative defenses. A:
1. A party who judicially admits a fact cannot
Note: Admissions in a pleading which had been later challenge that fact as judicial
withdrawn or superseded by an amended pleading, admissions constitute waiver of proof;
although filed in the same case, are considered as production of evidence is dispensed with;
extrajudicial admissions. The srcinal must be proved 2. No evidence is needed to prove a judicial
by the party who relies thereon by formally offering it admission and it cannot be contradicted
in evidence (Torres v. CA, G.R. Nos. L-37420-21, July 31, unless it is shown to have been made
1984).
through palpable mistake or that no such
admission was made.
Note: Justice Regalado opines that as amended, it
would appear that Sec. 4, Rule 129 includes
b. HOW JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS MAY BE
superseded pleadings as judicial admissions (Regalado,
CONTRADICTED
Vol. II, p. 837, 2005 ed.) .
Q: How can judicial admission be contradicted?

Q: What are the rules on admissions made in
pleadings which were not filed with the court?
A: It may be contradicted by showing:
A:
1. That it was made through palpable mistake;
1. If signed by the party litigant himself – 2. That no such admission was made (Sec. 4);
considered as extrajudicial admission. or
2. If signed by the counsel – not admissible 3. To prevent manifest injustice (e.g. pre-trial
in civil cases, Sec. 7, Rule 18).
because a counsel only binds his client with
respect to admissions in open court and in 4. JUDICIAL NOTICE OF FOREIGN LAWS, LAW OF
pleadings actually filed with the court.
NATIONS AND MUNICIPAL ORDINANCE
Q: What is self-serving evidence?
Q: May courts take judicial notice of foreign laws?
A: No. The self-serving rule which prohibits the
A:
admission of declaration of a witness applies only
GR: Foreign laws may not be taken judicial
to extrajudicial admissions. If the declaration is
made in open court, such is raw evidence. It is not notice of, and have to be proved like any other
self-serving. It is admissible because the witness fact.
XPN: When said laws are within the actual
may be cross-examined on that matter.
knowledge of the court and such laws are:
Q: Are judicial admissions made by the accused
1. Well and generally known;
during his arraignment binding upon him?
2. Actually ruled upon in other cases before
it; and
A: No. A plea of guilty entered by the accused may
3. None of the parties claim otherwise.
be later withdrawn at any time before the
Q: Suppose a foreign law was pleaded as part of
judgment of conviction becomes final. Such plea is
the defense of the defendant but no evidence was
not admissible in evidence against the accused and
presented to prove the existence of said law, what
is not even considered as an extrajudicial
is the presumption to be taken by the court as to
admission. the wordings of said law?
Q: Are admissions made during a pre-trial in a civil
A: The doctrine of processual presumption applies.
case considered as judicial admissions?
The presumption is that the wordings of the foreign
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
law are the same as the local law (doctrine of 3. When the action is closely interrelated to
processual presumption) (Northwest Orient Airlines another case pending between the same
v. CA, G.R. No. 83033, June 8, 1990; Moran, Vol. 6, parties;
p. 34, 1980 ed.). (1997 Bar Question) 4. Where the interest of the public in
ascertaining the truth are of paramount
Q: What are the rules with regard to judicial notice importance;
of ordinances? 5. In cases seeking to determine what is
reasonable exercise of discretion or
A: whether or not the previous ruling is
1. MTCs are required to take judicial notice of applicable in a case under consideration; or
the ordinances of the municipality or city 6. Where there is finality of a judgment in
wherein they sit. another case that was previously pending
determination and therefore, res judicata.
2. RTCs must take judicial notice only: (Herrera, Vol. V, pp. 89-90, 1999 ed.)
a. When expressly authorized to do so by
statute; or Q: Anna and Badong were accused of killing Cathy.
b. In case on appeal before them and However, only Anna was arrested since Badong
wherein the inferior court took judicial went in to hiding. After trial, Anna was acquitted
notice of an ordinance involved in the of the charge in a decision rendered by Judge
same case. Santos. Subsequently, Badong was arrested and
brought to trial. After trial, Badong was found
3. Appellate courts may also take judicial guilty of homicide in a decision rendered by Judge
notice of ordinances not only because the Yantok, the judge who replaced Judge Santos after
lower courts took judicial notice thereof but the latter retired. On appeal, Badong argues that
because these are facts capable of Judge Yantok should have taken judicial notice of
unquestionable demonstration. (Riano, the acquittal of Anna rendered by Judge Santos. Is
Evidence: A Restatement for the Bar, pp. 90- Badong correct?
91, 2009 ed.)
A: No. The appreciation of one judge of the
Q: What is the rule on judicial notice of records of testimony of a certain witness is not binding on
another case previously tried? another judge who heard the testimony of the
same witness on the same matter. Each magistrate
A: who hears the testimony of a witness is called upon
GR: Courts are not authorized to take judicial to make hisillogical

therefore, own appreciation of because
to argue that the evidence. It is,
one judge
notice of the contents of the records of other
cases, even when such cases have been tried or made a conclusion in a certain way with respect to
are pending in the same court, and one or more of the accused; it necessarily dictates
notwithstanding the fact that both cases may that the succeeding judge who heard the same case
have been heard or are actually pending before against the other accused should automatically
the same judge. (Calamba Steel Center, Inc. v. make the same conclusion (People v. Langit, G.R.
CIR, G.R. No. 151857, Apr. 28, 2005) Nos. 134757-58, Aug. 4, 2000).
XPNS: Note: All courts must take judicial notice of the

1. When in the absence of any objection, with decisions of the Supreme Court as they are duty bound
the knowledge of the opposing party, the to know the rulings of the highest tribunal and to apply
contents of said other cases are clearly them in the adjudication of cases, jurisprudence being
referred to by title and number in a pending a part of our judicial system
action and adopted or read into the record
of the latter; C. OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE
2. When the srcinal record of the other case
or any part of it is actually withdrawn from 1. NATURE OF OBJECT EVIDENCE
the ahies at the outs disetio upo
the request, or with the consent, of the Q: Define object evidence.
parties, and admitted as part of the record
of the pending case. (Jumamil v. Cafe, G.R. A: Object evidence, also known as real evidence,
No. 144570, Sept. 21, 2005) demonstrative evidence, autoptic preference and
physical evidence, is that evidence which is
addressed to the senses of the court (Sec. 1). It is
not limited to the view of an object. It extends to
the visual, auditory, tactile, gustatory, and object in question as to render a view
olfactory. It is considered as evidence of the highest thereof unnecessary. (Regalado, Vol. II, p.
order. 716, 2008 ed.)
Q: What are the purposes of authentication of Q: Is exhibition of the object which is repulsive or
object evidence? indecent absolutely prohibited?
A: A: No. If a view of the object is necessary in the

1. Prevent the introduction of an object interest of justice, such object may still be
different from the one testified about; and exhibited, but the court may exclude the public
2. Ensure that there has been no significant from such view. Such view may not be refused if
hages i the ojets oditio. the indecent or immoral objects constitute the very
basis of the criminal or civil action ( e.g. obscene
2. REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY pictures or exhibits). (Moran, p. 73)
Q: What are the requisites for the object evidence Q: In a criminal case for murder, the prosecution
to be admissible? offered as evidence photographs showing the
accused mauling the victim with several of the
A: It must latte’s companions. The person who took the
1. Be relevant to the fact in issue; photograph was not presented as a witness. Be
2. Be authenticated before it is admitted; that as it may, the prosecution presented the
3. Not be hearsay; companions of the victim who testified that they
4. Not be privileged; and were the ones in the photographs. The defense
5. Meet any additional requirement set by objected to the admissibility of the photographs
law. because the person who took the photographs
was not presented as witness. Is the contention of
Q: What does object evidence include? the defense tenable?
A: A: No. Photographs, when presented in evidence,

1. Any article or object which may be known must be identified by the photographer as to its
or perceived by the use of the senses; production and testified as to the circumstances
2. Examination of the anatomy of a person or under which they were produced. The value of this
of any substance taken therefrom; kind of evidence lies in its being a correct
3. Conduct
experiments;of and
tests, demonstrations or representation
its admissibilityorisreproduction
determined of
bythe
its srcinal,
accuracyandin
4. Examination of representative portrayals of portraying the scene at the time of the crime.
the object in question ( e.g. maps, diagrams)
The photographer, however, is not the only witness
Q: May the courts refuse the introduction of who can identify the pictures he has taken. The
object or real evidence and rely on testimonial correctness of the photograph as a faithful
evidence alone? representation of the object portrayed can be
proved prima facie, either by the testimony of the
A: Yes, but only if: person who made it or by other competent
1. Its exhibition is contrary to public morals or witnesses who can testify to its exactness and
decency; accuracy, after which the court can admit it subject
2. To require its being viewed in court or in to impeachment as to its accuracy.
ocular inspection would result in delays,
inconvenience, or unnecessary expenses Here, the photographs are admissible as evidence
which are out of proportion to the inasmuch as the correctness thereof was testified
evidentiary value of such object; to by the companions of the victim (Sison v. People,
3. Such object evidence would be confusing or G.R. Nos. 108280-83, Nov. 16, 1995).
misleading, as when the purpose is to prove
the former condition of the object and Q: Ron was charged with murder for shooting
there is no preliminary showing that there Carlo. After trial, Ron was found guilty as charged.
has been no substantial change in said On appeal, Ron argued that the trial court should
condition; or have acquitted him as his guilt was not proved
4. The testimonial or documentary evidence beyond reasonable doubt. He argues that the
already presented clearly portrays the paraffin test conducted on him 2 days after he was
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
arrested yielded a negative result. Hence, he could Note: It is a discretionary act of the trial court to go to
not have shot Carlo. Is Ron correct? the place where the object is located, when the object
evidence cannot be brought in courts.
A: No. While the paraffin test was negative, such
fact alone did not ipso facto prove that Ron is 6. CHAIN OF CUSTODY IN RELATION TO SECTION
innocent. A negative paraffin result is not 21 OF THE COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS DRUGS
conclusive proof that a person has not fired a gun. ACT OF 2002
It is possible to fire a gun and yet be negative for
nitrates, as when the culprit is wearing gloves or he Q: What is Chain of Custody Rule in relation to Sec.
washes his hands afterwards. Here, since Ron 21 of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of
submitted himself for paraffin testing only two days 2002?
after the shooting, it was likely he had already
washed his hands thoroughly, thus removing all A: It is a method of authenticating evidence. It
traces of nitrates therefrom (People v. Brecinio, G.R. requires

preceded that the admission
by evidence of support
sufficient to an exhibit be
a finding
No. 138534, Mar. 17, 2004).
that the matter in question is what the proponent
3. CATEGORIES OF OBJECT EVIDENCE claims it to be. It would include testimony about
every link in the chain, from the moment the item
Q: What are the categories of object evidence for was picked up to the time it is offered into
purposes of authentication? evidence, in such a way that every person who
touched the exhibit would describe how and from
A: whom it was received, where it was and what
1. Unique objects – those that have readily happeed to it hile i the itess possessio, the
identifiable marks (e.g. a calibre 40 gun with condition in which it was received and the condition
serial number XXX888) in which it was delivered to the next link in the
2. Objects made unique – those that are chain.
readily identifiable (e.g. a bolo knife used to These witnesses would then describe the
hack a victim which could be identified by a precautions taken to ensure that there had been no
witness in court) change in the condition of the item and no
3. Non-unique objects – those which have no opportunity for someone not in the chain to have
identifying marks and cannot be marked possession of the same. (Lopez v. People, G.R. No.
(e.g. footprints left at a crime scene) 172953, Apr. 30, 2008)
Q: When is there a need to establish a chain of

4. DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE custody?
Q: Distinguish real evidence from demonstrative
evidence. A: It is necessary when the object evidence is non-
unique as it is not readily identifiable, was not made
A: identifiable or cannot be made identifiable, e.g.
Real evidence Demonstrative Evidence drops of blood or oil, drugs in powder form, fiber,
Tangible object that grains of sand and similar objects. (Riano, Evidence:
Tangible evidence that
played some actual A Restatement for the Bar, p. 149, 2009 ed.)
merely illustrates a matter
role in the matter that
of importance in the
gave rise to the Q: What is the purpose of establishing a chain of
litigation
litigation custody?
Intends to show that the
Intends to prove that demonstrative object fairly A: To guaranty the integrity of the physical evidence
the object is used in represents or illustrates and to prevent the introduction of evidence which
the underlying event what it is alleged to be is not authentic but where the exhibit is positively
illustrated identified the chain of custody of physical evidence
is irrelevant. (Ibid.)
5. VIEW OF AN OBJECT OR SCENE
7. RULE ON DNA EVIDENCE (A.M. NO. 06-11-5-SC)
Q: What is ocularspetio
i o ie?
Q: In what cases do the Rules on DNA Evidence
A: An ocular inspection conducted by the judge apply?
without the presence of the parties or due notice is
not valid, as an ocular inspection is part of the trial. A: It shall apply whenever DNA evidence is offered,
used, or proposed to be offered or used as evidence
in all criminal and civil actions as well as special A: In pending actions, the appropriate court may, at
proceedings (Sec. 1). any time issue a DNA testing order either motu
proprio or upon application of any person who has
a. MEANING OF DNA a legal interest in the matter in litigation after due
hearing and notice to the parties and upon showing
Q: What is DNA? of the following:
1. A biological sample exists that is relevant to
A: DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) is the chain of the case;
molecules found in every nucleated cell of the body 2. The biological sample:
(Sec. 3, Rule on DNA Evidence). It is the 3. was not previously subjected to the type of
fudaetal uildig lok of a pesos etie DNA testing now requested; or
genetic make-up, which is found in all human cells 4. was previously subjected to DNA testing,
and is the same in every cell of the same person but the results may require confirmation for
(People v. Umanito, G.R. No. 172607, Oct. 26, good reasons;
2007). 5. The DNA testing uses a scientifically valid
technique;
Q: What is DNA evidence? 6. The DNA testing has the scientific potential
to produce new information that is relevant
A: It constitutes the totality of the DNA profiles, to the proper resolution of the case; and
results and other genetic information directly 7. The existence of other factors, if any, which
generated from DNA testing of biological samples the court may consider as potentially
(Sec. 3). affecting the accuracy or integrity of the
DNA testing (Sec. 4).
Q: What is DNA testing?
Q: Is the order granting the DNA testing
A: It means verified and credible scientific methods appealable?
which include the extraction of DNA from biological
samples, the generation of DNA profiles and the A: No. An order granting the DNA testing shall be
comparison of the information obtained from the immediately executory and shall not be appealable.
DNA testing of biological samples for the purpose of Any petition for certiorari initiated therefrom shall
determining, with reasonable certainty, whether or not, in any way, stay the implementation thereof,
not the DNA obtained from two or more distinct unless a higher court issues an injunctive order (Sec.
biological samples srcinates from the same person 5).
(direct
srcinateidentification)
from related orpersons
if the (Kinship
biologicalAnalysis)
samples Q: Duig Aleis’ tial fo ape ith ude, the
(Sec. 3). prosecution sought to introduce DNA evidence
against him, based on forensic laboratory
Note: The scientific basis of this test comes from the matching of the materials found at the crime scene
fact that our differences as individuals are due to the ad Aleis’ hai ad lood saples. Aleis’ ousel
differences in the composition of our genes. These objected, claiming that DNA evidence is
genes comprise a chemical substance, the inadmissible because the materials taken from
deoxyribonucleic acid or DNA [The Court Systems Alexis were in violation of his constitutional right
Journal (1999)]. against self-incrimination as well as his right of
privacy and personal integrity. Should the DNA
b. APPLICATION FOR DNA TESTING ORDER evidence be admitted or not? Reason.
Q: May DNA testing be conducted absent a prior A: The DNA evidence should be admitted. It is not
court order? in violation of the constitutional right against self-
incrimination or his right of privacy and personal
A: Yes. The Rules on DNA Evidence does not integrity. The right against self-incrimination is
preclude a DNA testing, without need of a prior applicable only to testimonial evidence. Extracting a
court order, at the behest of any party, including blood sample and cutting a strand from the hair of
law enforcement agencies, before a suit or the accused are purely mechanical acts that do not
proceeding is commenced (Sec. 4). involve his discretion nor require his intelligence.
(2004 Bar Question)
Q: What are the requisites for the issuance of a
DNA testing order?
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
Q: Is the result of DNA testing automatically 2. Such sample is relevant to the case; and
admitted as evidence in the case in which it was 3. The testing would probably result in the
sought for? reversal or modification of the judgment of
conviction (Sec. 6).
A: No. The grant of a DNA testing application shall
not be construed as an automatic admission into Q: What is the remedy of the convict if the post-
evidence of any component of the DNA evidence conviction DNA testing result is favorable to him?
that may be obtained as a result thereof (Sec. 5).
A: The convict or the prosecution may file a petition
Q: If a DNA test was conducted, what are the for a writ of habeas corpus in the court of srcin. In
possible results that it may yield? case the court, after due hearing, finds the petition
to be meritorious, it shall reverse or modify the
A: judgment of conviction and order the release of the
1. The samples are similar, and could have convict, unless continued detention is justified for a
srcinated from the same source (Rule of lawful cause (Sec. 10).
Inclusion). In such a case, the analyst
proceeds to determine the statistical d. ASSESSMENT OF PROBATIVE VALUE OF DNA
significance of the similarity. EVIDENCE AND ADMISSIBILITY
2. The samples are different hence it must
have srcinated from different sources (Rule Q: What should the courts consider in determining
of Exclusion). This conclusion is absolute the probative value of DNA evidence?
and requires no further analysis;
3. The test is inconclusive. This might occur A:
due to degradation, contamination, failure 1. The chain of custody, including how the
of some aspect of protocol, or some other biological samples were collected, how they
reasons. Analysis might be repeated to were handled, and the possibility of
obtain a more conclusive result (People v. contamination of the samples;
Vallejo, G.R. No. 144656, May 9, 2002). 2. The DNA testing methodology, including the
procedure followed in analyzing the
Q: What should the courts consider in evaluating samples, the advantages and disadvantages
DNA testing results? of the procedure, and compliance with the
scientifically valid standards in conducting
A: the tests;
1. The
DNA evaluation
evidence of or
the the
weightrelevance
of matchingof 3. The forensic byDNA
accreditation any laboratory, including
reputable standards-
mismatching DNA evidence; setting institution and the qualification of
2. The results of the DNA testing in the light of the analyst who conducted the tests. If the
the totality of the other evidence presented laboratory is not accredited, the relevant
in the case; and experience of the laboratory in forensic
3. DNA results that exclude the putative casework and credibility shall be properly
parent from paternity shall be conclusive established; and
proof of non-paternity (Sec. 9). 4. The reliability of the testing result (Sec. 7).
c. POST-CONVICTION DNA TESTING; REMEDY Q: What are the things to be considered in

assessing the probative value of DNA evidence?
Q: To whom is the post-conviction DNA testing
available? A:
1. How the samples are collected;
A: Post-conviction DNA testing may be available, 2. How they were handled;
without need of prior court order, to the 3. The possibility of the contamination of the
prosecution or any person convicted by final and samples;
executory judgment. 4. The procedure followed in analyzing the
samples;
Q: What are the requisites for the applicability of 5. Whether the proper standards and
the Post-conviction DNA testing? procedures were followed in conducting the
tests; and
A: 6. The qualification of the analyst who
1. Existing biological sample; conducted the tests. (Ibid.)

e. RULES ON EVALUATION OF RELIABILITY OF THE A:

DNA TESTING METHODOLOGY 1. The document must be relevant;
2. The evidence must be authenticated;
Q: What are the things to be considered in 3. The document must be authenticated by a
evaluating whether or not the DNA testing competent witness; and
methodology is reliable? 4. The document must be formally offered in
evidence.
A:
1. The falsifiability of the principles or 3. BEST EVIDENCE RULE
methods used, that is, whether the theory
or technique can be and has been tested; a. MEANING OF THE RULE
2. The subjection to peer review and
publication of the principles or methods; Q: What is Best Evidence Rule?
3. The general acceptance of the principles or

methods by the relevant scientific A:
community; GR: It provides that when the subject of the
4. The existence and maintenance of inquiry is the contents of the document, no
standards and controls to ensure the evidence shall be admissible other than the
correctness of data generated; srcinal document itself.
5. The existence of an appropriate reference
population database; and XPNs:
6. The general degree of confidence attributed 1. When the srcinal has been lost or
to mathematical calculations used in destroyed, or cannot be produced in
comparing DNA profiles and the significance court, without bad faith on the part of the
and limitation of statistical calculations used offeror;
in comparing DNA profiles. 2. When the srcinal is in the custody or
under the control of the party against
D. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE whom the evidence is offered, and the
latter fails to produce it after reasonable
1. MEANING OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE notice;
3. When the srcinal consists of numerous
Q: Define Documentary Evidence. accounts or other documents which
cannot be examined in court without
A: Documents as evidence consist of writings or any great loss of time and them
the fact
material containing letters, words, numbers, be established from is sought to
only the
figures, symbols, or other modes of written general result of the whole;
expressions, offered as proof of their contents (Sec. Note: The voluminous records must be
2). made accessible to the adverse party so
that the correctness of the portion
Q: May a private document be offered and produced or summary of the document
admitted in evidence both as documentary may be tested on cross-examination.
evidence and as object evidence? Explain. 4. When the srcinal is a public record in the
custody of a public officer or is recorded
A: Yes. A private document is considered as object in a public office (Sec. 3)
evidence when it is addressed to the senses of the Note: Where the issue is only as to
court or when it is presented in order to establish whether such a document was actually
executed, or exists, or on the
certain physical evidence or characteristics that are
circumstances relevant to or
visible on the paper and the writings that comprise
surrounding its execution, the best
the document. It is considered as documentary evidence rule does not apply and
evidence when it is offered as proof of its contents. testimonial evidence is admissible.
(2005 Bar Question)
b. WHEN APPLICABLE
2. REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY
Q: What are the requisites for admissibility of Q: When is this applicable?

documentary evidence? A: The rule will oe ito pla ol he the
sujet of iui is the otets of a douet.
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
Q: Why is the best evidence rule often described presented an expert witness to prove that her
as a misnomer? signature in the promissory note was forged. Jean
ojeted to the pesetatio of Paula’s epet
A: Because it merely requires the best evidence witness on the ground that the finding of said
available and, in the absence thereof, allows the witness is based on a mere photocopy of the
introduction of secondary evidence. promissory note. Is the objection of Jean tenable?
Alternative Answer: A: Yes. As a rule, forgery cannot be presumed and

It is a misnomer because it is applicable only to must be proved by clear, positive and convincing
documentary evidence and not to testimonial and evidence and the burden of proof lies on the party
object evidence. (1994 Bar Question) alleging forgery. The best evidence of a forged
signature in an instrument is the instrument itself
Q: At the trial of Ace for violation of the reflecting the alleged forged signature.
Dangerous Drugs Act, the prosecution offers in
evidence a photocopy of the marked P100.00 bills The fact of forgery can only be established by a
used i the u-ust opeatio. Ae ojets to comparison between the alleged forged signature
the introduction of the photocopy on the ground and the authentic and genuine signature of the
that the best evidence rule prohibits the person whose signature is theorized upon to have
introduction of secondary evidence in lieu of the been forged. Without the srcinal document
srcinal. containing the alleged forged signature, one cannot
1. Is the photocopy real (object) evidence or make a definitive comparison which would
documentary evidence? establish forgery. A comparison based on a mere
2. Is the photocopy admissible in evidence? photocopy or reproduction of the document under
controversy cannot produce reliable results (Heirs
A: of Gregorio v. CA, G.R. No. 117609, Dec. 29, 1998).
1. It is real (object) evidence, because the
marked bills are real evidence. Q: When Anna loaned a sum of money to Blair,
Anna typed a single copy of the promissory note,
2. Yes, it is admissible in evidence, because the which they both signed. Anna made two
best evidence rule does not apply to object photocopies of the promissory note, giving one
or real evidence. The best evidence rule is copy to Blair and retaining the other copy. Anna
inapplicable since such secondary evidence entrusted the typewritten copy to his counsel for
is only intended to establish the existence of safekeeping. The copy with Anna's counsel was
adocument.
transaction andBar
(1994 notQuestion)
the contents of the destroyed when the
1. In an action law office
to collect waspromissory
on the burned. note,
which is deemed to be the "srcinal" copy for
Q: Are affidavits and depositions considered as the purpose of the best evidence rule?
best evidence? 2. Can the photocopies in the hands of the
parties be considered "duplicate srcinal
A: No, hence, not admissible if the affiants and copies"?
witnesses are available as witnesses. (Regalado, 3. As counsel for Anna, how will you prove the
Vol. II, p. 721, 2008 ed.) loan given by Anna to Blair?
Q: What is the best evidence of telegrams and A:

cables? 1. The copy that was signed and lost is the
only "srcinal" copy for purposes of the best
A: It depends on the issue to be proved. evidence rule (Sec. 4 [b]).
1. Contents of the telegram received by the
addressee: the srcinal dispatch received. 2. No, because they merely are photocopies
2. The telegram sent by the sender: the which were not signed (Mahilum v. CA, G.R.
message delivered for transmission. No. L-17970, July 10, 1966), They constitute
3. Inaccuracy of transmission of the telegram: secondary evidence (Sec. 5).
both telegrams as sent and received
(Regalado, Vol. II, pp. 722-723, 2008 ed.). 3. It may be proved by secondary evidence
through the photocopies of the promissory
Q: In a civil case for collection of money, Paula note. When the srcinal document is lost or
sought to escape liability from a promissory note destroyed, or cannot be produced in court,
by showing that the same was a forgery. She the offeror, upon proof of its execution or

existence and the cause of its unavailability ledgers, all the entries are likewise equally
without bad faith on his part, may prove its regarded as srcinals (Sec. 4).
contents by a copy, or by a recital of its
contents in some authentic document, or by Q: What is the rule on duplicate srcinal?
the testimony of witnesses in the order
stated (Sec. 5). (1997 Bar Question) A: It states that when a document is in two or more
copies executed at or about the same time with
Q: Car was declared in default by the MTC in an identical contents, all such copies are equally
action for unlawful detainer. Plaintiff, Loise was regarded as srcinals (Sec. 4b, Rule 130). It may be
allowed to present evidence in support of her introduced in evidence without accounting for the
complaint. Photocopies of official receipts and non-production of the other copies.
srcinal copies of affidavits were attached to the
position paper submitted by Loise.
d. REQUISITES FOR INTRODUCTION OF
Said documents were offered by Loise and SECONDARY EVIDENCE
admitted in evidence by the court on the basis of
which the court rendered judgment in favor of Q: What is secondary evidence?
Loise. Car appealed to the RTC claiming that the
judgment is not valid because the MTC based its A: Secondary evidence is that which shows that
judgment on mere photocopies and affidavits of better or primary evidence exists as to the proof of
persons not presented in court. Is the claim of Car the fact in question. It is the class of evidence that
valid? Explain. is relevant to the fact in issue, it being first shown
that the primary evidence of the fact is not
A: Yes, although the rules on summary procedure obtainable. It performs the same functions as that
requires merely the submission of position papers, of primary evidence. (Francisco, p. 68, 1992 ed.)
the evidence submitted with the position paper
must be admissible in evidence. Photocopies of Note: All srcinals must be first accounted for before
official receipts and affidavits are not admissible in one can resort to secondary evidence. It must appear
evidence without proof of loss of the srcinals. that all of them have been lost or destroyed or cannot
(2000 Bar Question) be produced in court. The non-production of the
srcinal document, unless it falls under any of the
Q: What is the Collateral Facts Rule? exceptions in Sec. 3, Rule 130, gives rise to the
presumption of suppression of evidence.
A: It states that a document or writing which is Q: When may secondary evidence be admitted?
eel ollateal to the issue ioled i the ase
on trial need not be proved. Where the purpose of
A: It may be admitted only by laying the basis for its
presenting a document is not to prove its contents,
but merely to give coherence to, or to make production and such requires compliance with the
intelligible the testimony of a witness regarding a following:
fact contemporaneous to the writing, the srcinal of 1. The offeror must prove the due execution
the document need not be presented. and existence of the srcinal document;
2. The offeror must show the cause of its
c. MEANING OF ORIGINAL
unavailability; and
3. The offeror must show that the
Q: What is an srcinal document?
unavailability was not due to his bad faith.
A: Thee ae thee oepts of oigial douet:

Accordingly, the correct order of proof is as follows :
existence, execution, loss, and contents. This order
1. The srcinal of a document is one the
contents of which are the subject of inquiry; may be changed if necessary at the sound
2. When a document is in 2 or more copies discretion of the court. (Citibank N.A. Mastercard v.
Teodoro, G.R. No. 150905, Sept. 23, 2003)
executed at or about the same time, with
identical contents, including signed carbon
Note: Intentional destruction of the srcinals by a
copies, all such copies are equally regarded
party who acted in good faith does not preclude the
as srcinals; or
3. When an entry is repeated in the regular introduction of secondary evidence of the contents
thereof.
course of business, one being copied from
another at or near the time of the
transaction, including entries in journals and
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
Q: What is the order of presentation of secondary 3. Any person who heard when the document
evidence? was being read;
4. Any person who was present when the
A: contents of the document were talked over
1. Copy of the srcinal; by the parties to such an extent as to give
2. A recital of the contents of the document in him reasonably full information of the
some authentic document; or contents; or
3. By the testimony of witnesses (Sec. 5, Rule 5. Any person to whom the parties have
130) stated or confessed the contents thereof.
Q: What is Definite Evidentiary Rule? Q: May the presentation or the offer of the
srcinal be waived?
A: Where the law specifically provides for the class
and quantum of secondary evidence to establish A: Yes, if the party against whom the secondary
the contents of a document, or bars secondary evidence is offered does not object thereto when
evidence of a lost document, such requirement is the same is offered in evidence, the secondary
controlling. E.g. Evidence of a lost notarial will evidence becomes primary evidence. But even
should consist of a testimony of at least two admitted as primary evidence, its probative value
credible witnesses who can clearly and distinctly must still meet the various tests by which its
establish its contents (Sec. 6, Rule 76). reliability is to be determined. Its admissibility
should not be confused with its probative value.
Q: How may the due execution of the document (Heirs of Teodoro De la Cruz v. CA, G.R. No. 117384,
be proved? Oct. 21, 1998)
A: It may be proved through the testimony of: Q: What facts must be shown by the party offering
1. The person who executed it; secondary evidence if the srcinal is in the custody
2. The person before whom its execution was of the adverse party?
acknowledged;
3. Any person who was present and saw it A:
executed and delivered; 1. Original is in the possession or under the
4. Any person who thereafter saw and control of the opponent;
recognized the signature; 2. Demand or notice is made to him by the
5. One to whom the parties thereto had proponent signifying that the document is
previously
or confessed the execution thereof; 3. needed;
Failure or refusal of opponent to produce
6. By evidence of the genuineness of the document in court; and
signature or handwriting of the maker. (Sec. 4. Satisfactory proof of existence of document
20, Rule 132) (Sec. 6).
Q: How may the loss or destruction

be proved? Note: The party who called for a document is not
obliged to offer it into evidence (Sec. 8).
A: It may be proved by:
1. Any person who knew of such fact; Q: What is the form of notice required to be given
2. Anyone who, in the judgment of the court, to the adverse party?
had made sufficient examination in the
places where the document or papers of A: No particular form of notice is required as long
similar character are usually kept by the as it fairly appraises the other party as to what
person in whose custody the document papers are desired. Even an oral demand in open
was and has been unable to find it; or court for such production at a reasonable time
3. Any person who has made any other thereafter will suffice. Such notice must, however,
investigation which is sufficient to satisfy be given to the adverse party, or his attorney, even
the court that the document is indeed lost. if the document is in the actual possession of a third
person. (Regalado, Vol. II, p. 726, 2008 ed.)
Q: How may the contents be proved?
Q: What is the effect if the refusal or failure of the
A: They may be proved by the testimony of: adverse party to produce the srcinal is justified?
1. Any person who signed the document;
2. Any person who read it; A: It does not give rise to the presumption of
suppression of evidence, or create an unfavorable
inference against him. It only authorizes the

presentation of secondary evidence. (Regalado, Vol. Note: The promissory note is an actionable document
II, p. 727, 2008 ed.) and the srcinal or a copy thereof should have been
attached to the complaint. (Sec. 7, Rule 8) In such a
Q: Paula filed a complaint against Lynette for the case, the genuineness and due execution of the note, if
recovery of a sum of money based on a promissory not denied under oath, would be deemed admitted.
note executed by Lynette. Paula alleged in her (Sec. 8, Rule 9)
complaint that although the promissory note says
that it is payable within 120 days, the truth is that Q: When Linda died, her common law husband,
the note is payable immediately after 90 days but Lito and their alleged daughter Nes executed an
that if Paula is willing, she may, upon request of etajudiial patitio of Li da’s estate. Theeafte,
Lynette give the latter up to 120 days to pay the the siblings of Linda filed an action for partition of
note. Lida’s estate and annulment of titles and
damages with the RTC. The RTC dismissed the
During the hearing, Paula testified that the truth is complaint and rendered that Nes was the
that the agreement between her and Lynette is for illegitimate daughter of the decedent and Lito
the latter to pay immediately after 90 days time. based solely on her birth certificate, which on
Also, since the srcinal note was with Lynette and closer examination, reveals that Nes was listed as
the latter would not surrender to Paula the adopted  oth Lida nd a Lito. Is the trial court
srcinal note which Lynette kept in a place about correct?
one day's trip from where she received the notice
to produce the note and in spite of such notice to A: No. The mere registration of a child in his or her
produce the same within 6 hours from receipt of birth certificate as the child of the supposed
such notice, Lynette failed to do so. Paula parents is not a valid adoption, does not confer
presented a copy of the note which was executed upon the child the status of an adopted child and
at the same time as the srcinal and with identical the legal rights of such child, and even amounts to
contents. simulation of the child's birth or falsification of his
or her birth certificate, which is a public document.
1. Over the objection of Lynette, will Paula be Furthermore, a record of birth is merely a prima
allowed to testify as to the true agreement or facie evidence of the facts contained therein. It is
contents of the promissory note? Why? not conclusive evidence of the truthfulness of the
2. Over the objection of Lynette, can Paula statements made there by the interested parties.
present a copy of the promissory note and Nes should have adduced evidence of her adoption,
in view of the contents of her birth certificate. The
have
favor?itWhy?
admitted as valid evidence in her records however are bereft of any such evidence
(Rivera v. Heirs of Villanueva, G.R. No. 141501, July
A: 21, 2006).
1. Yes. As an exception to the parol evidence
rule, a party may present evidence to Q: What are the requisites for the admission of
modify, explain or add to the terms of the secondary evidence when the srcinal consists of
written agreement if he puts in issue in numerous accounts?
his pleading the failure of the written
agreement to express the true intent and A:
agreement of the parties thereto. Here, 1. The srcinal must consist of numerous
Paula has alleged in her complaint that accounts or other documents;
the promissory note does not express the 2. They cannot be examined in court without
true intent and agreement of the parties. great loss of time; and
3. The fact sought to be established from
2. Yes. The copy in possession of Paula is a them is only the general result of the whole.
duplicate srcinal because it was executed (Sec. 3c, Rule 130)
at the same time as the srcinal and with
Note: Secondary evidence may consist of a summary
identical contents. Moreover, the failure
of the voluminous documents or records. (Herrera,
of Lynette to produce the srcinal of the
Vol. V, p. 203, 1999 ed.) Such records must be made
note is excusable because she was not
given reasonable notice, a requirement accessible to the adverse party so that the correctness
of the summary of the voluminous records may be
under the Rules before secondary tested on cross-examination. (Compania Maritima v.
evidence may be presented. (2001 Bar Allied Free Workers Union, et.al., G.R. No. L-28999,
Question) May 24, 1977)
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
A: An electronic document is admissible in evidence

Q: How may the contents of the document be if it complies with the rules on admissibility
proved when the srcinal is in the custody of a prescribed by the Rules of Court and related laws
public officer? and is authenticated in the manner prescribed by
the Rules on Electronic Evidence (Sec. 2, Rule 3).
A: The contents may be proved by:
1. A certified copy issued by the public officer a. MEANING OF ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE;
in custody thereof (Sec. 7, Rule 130); and ELECTRONIC DATA MASSAGE
2. Official publication. (Herrera, Vol. V, p. 203,
1999 ed.) Q: What is Electronic Evidence?
Q: What is the effect of not offering a document in A: According to Black's Law Dictionary, evidence is
evidence after calling for its production and "any species of proof, or probative matter, legally
inspection? presented at the trial of an issue, by the act of the
parties and through the medium of witnesses,
A: If the party who calls for the production of a records, documents, exhibits, concrete objects, etc.
document does not offer the same in evidence, no for the purpose of inducing belief in the minds of
unfavorable inference may be drawn from such the court or jury as to their contention." Electronic
failure. This is because a party who calls for the information (like paper) generally is admissible into
production of a document is not required to offer it. evidence in a legal proceeding..
(Sec. 8, Rule 130)
Q: What are the distinctions between the Q: What is Electronic Data Message?
production of documents under Sec. 8, Rule 130
and Rule 27 (mode of discovery)? A: Electronic data message refers to information
generated, sent, received or stored by electronic,
A: optical or similar means.
SEC. 8, RULE 130 RULE 27
The production of b. PROBATIVE VALUE OF ELECTRONIC
Procured by mere notice
document is in the nature DOCUMENTS OR EVIDENTIARY WEIGHT; METHOD
to the adverse party,
of a mode of discovery OF PROOF
which is a condition
and can be sought only by
precedent for the
proper motion in the trial Q: What are the factors to be considered in
subsequent introduction
court and is permitted
of secondary evidence only upon good cause assessing
document?evidentiary weight of an electronic
by the proponent.
shown.
Contemplates a situation
Presupposes that the A:
wherein the document is
document to be 1. The reliability of the manner or method in
either assumed to be
produced is intended as which it was generated, stored or
favorable to the party in
evidence for the communicated, including but not limited
possession thereof or that
proponent who is to input and output procedures, controls,
the party seeking its
presumed to have tests and checks for accuracy and
production is not
knowledge of its reliability of the electronic data message
sufficiently informed of
contents. or document, in the light of all the
the contents of the same.
circumstances as well as any relevant
4. RULES ON ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE (A.M. NO. 01- agreement;
7-01-SC) 2. The reliability of the manner in which its
srcinator was identified;
Q: In what cases do the Rules on Electronic 3. The integrity of the information and
Evidence applies? communication system in which it its
recorded or stored, including but not
A: It shall apply to all civil actions and proceedings, limited to the hardware and computer
as well as quasi-judicial and administrative cases programs or software used as well as
programming errors;
(Sec. 2, Rule 1). 4. The familiarity of the witness or the
Q: State the rule on the admissibility of electronic person who made the entry with the
evidence. communication and information system;

5. The nature and quality of the information 1. The electronic signature is that of the
which went into the communication and person to whom it correlates;
information system upon which the 2. The electronic signature was affixed by that
electronic data message document was person with the intention of authenticating
based; or or approving the electronic document to
6. Other factors which the court may which it is related or to indicate such
consider as affecting accuracy or integrity pesos oset to the transaction
of the electronic document or electronic embodied therein; and
data message. (Sec. 1, Rule 7) 3. The methods or processes utilized to affix or
verify the electronic signature operated
C. AUTHENTICATION OF ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS without error or fault (Sec. 3, Rule 6).
AND ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES
Q: What is a Digital Signature?
Q: How is an electronic document authenticated?
A: It refers to an electronic signature consisting of a
A: transformation of an electronic document or an
1. By evidence that it had been digitally electronic data message using an asymmetric or
signed by the person purported to have public cryptosystem such that a person having the
signed the same; initial untransformed electronic document and the
2. By evidence that other appropriate siges puli ke a auatel deteie:
security procedures or devices as may be 1. whether the transformation was created
authorized by the Supreme Court or by using the private key that corresponds to
law for authentication of electronic the siges puli ke; ad
documents were applied to the 2. whether the initial electronic document had
document; or been altered after the transformation was
3. By other evidence showing its integrity made [Sec. 1(e), Rule 2]
and reliability to the satisfaction of the
judge (Sec. 2, Rule 5). Q: What is the effect of authentication of digital
signatures?
Q: What is Electronic Signature?
A: Upon authentication, it shall be presumed that:
A: It refers to any distinctive mark, characteristic 1. The information contained in a certificate is
and/or sound in electronic form, representing the correct;
identity of with
associated a personthe and attached
electronic datato message
or logically
or 2. The digital signature
operational period ofwas created during the
a certificate;
electronic document or any methodology or 3. No cause exists to render a certificate
procedure employed or adopted by a person and invalid or revocable;
executed or adopted by such person with the 4. The message associated with a digital
intention of authenticating, signing or approving an signature has not been altered from the
electronic data message or electronic document. time it was signed; and
For purposes of these Rules, an electronic signature 5. A certificate had been issued by the
includes digital signatures [Sec. 1 (j), Rule 2]. certification authority indicated therein
(Sec. 4, Rule 6).
Q: How is an electronic signature authenticated?
d. ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS AND THE HEARSAY
A: RULE
1. By evidence that a method or process was
utilized to establish a digital signature and Q: When is the Hearsay Rule not applicable to
verify the same; electronic documents?
2. By any other means provided by law; or
3. By any other means satisfactory to the judge A: A memorandum, report, record or data
as establishing the genuineness of the compilation of acts, events, conditions, opinions, or
electronic signature (Sec. 2, Rule 6). diagnoses, made by electronic, optical or other
similar means at or near the time of or from
Q: What is the effect of authentication of an transmission or supply of information by a person
electronic signature? with knowledge thereof, and kept in the regular
course or conduct of a business activity, and such
A: Upon authentication, it shall be presumed that: was the regular practice to make the
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
memorandum, report, record, or data compilation 5. PAROL EVIDENCE RULE

by electronic, optical or similar means, all of which
are shown by the testimony of the custodian or Q: What is Parol Evidence?
other qualified witnesses, is excepted from the rule
on hearsay evidence (Sec. 1, Rule 8). A: It is any evidence aliunde (extrinsic evidence)
which is intended or tends to vary or contradict a
Note: The presumption provided for in Section 1 of complete and enforceable agreement embodied in
this Rule may be overcome by evidence of the a document (Regalado, Vol. II, p. 730, 2008 ed.). It
untrustworthiness of the source of information or the may refer to testimonial, real or documentary
method or circumstances of the preparation, evidence.
transmission or storage thereof (Sec. 2, Rule 8) .
Q: What is the rationale of the parol evidence
e. AUDIO, PHOTOGRAPHIC, VIDEO AND rule?
EPHEMERAL EVIDENCE
A:
Q: May parties present audio, photographic or 1. To give stability to written statements;
video evidence? Discuss. 2. To remove the temptation and possibility of
perjury; and
A: Yes. Audio, photographic and video evidence of 3. To prevent possible fraud.
events, acts or transactions shall be admissible
provided it shall be shown, presented or displayed Q: Distinguish the kinds of ambiguities.
to the court and shall be identified, explained or
authenticated by the person who made the A:
recording or by some other person competent to INTRINSIC OR EXTRINSIC OR
testify on the accuracy thereof (Sec. 1, Rule 11). INTERMEDIATE
LATENT PATENT
On its face, the
Q: What is ephemeral electronic communication? Ambiguity is
writing appears Ambiguity
apparent on the
clear and consists in the
face of the
A: It refers to telephone conversations, text unambiguous use of
writing and
messages, chat room sessions, streaming audio, but there are equivocal
requires that
streaming video, and other electronic forms of collateral words
something be
communication the evidence of which is not matters which susceptible of
added to make
recorded or retained. [Sec. 1(k)] make the two or more
the meaning
meaning interpretation
Q: Are text messages admissible as evidence? uncertain certain
Cannot be
Curable by Curable by
cured by
A: Yes. Text messages have been classified as evidence evidence
evidence
ephemeral electronic communication under Section aliunde aliunde
aliunde
1(k), Rule 2 of the Rules on Electronic Evidence, and
shall be proven by the testimony of a person who
Q: What is the piiple of falsa
 demonstratio
was a party to the same or has personal knowledge
?
non nice cum de corpore constat
thereof (Vidallon-Magtolis v. Cielito Salud, A.M. No.
CA-05-20-P, Sept. 9, 2005).
A: It liteall eas a eoeous desiptio does
ot spoil the at. It states that the false description
Q: How shall ephemeral electronic communication
does not injure or vitiate a document if the subject
be proven?
is sufficiently identified. The incorrect description
shall be rejected as surplusage while the correct
A: It shall be proven by the testimony of a person
and complete description standing alone shall
who was a party to the same or has personal
sustain the validity of the writing (Regalado, Vol. II,
knowledge thereof. In the absence or unavailability
p. 735, 2008 ed.). Parol evidence is admissible to
of such witnesses, other competent evidence be
prove mistake in the execution of a written
admitted. A recording of the telephone
instrument.
conversation or ephemeral electronic
communication shall be covered by the
immediately preceding section. If the foregoing Q: May a condition
subsequent precedent
be established and
by parol a condition
evidence?
communications are recorded or embodied in an
electronic document, then the provisions of Rule 5
A: Condition precedent may be established by parol
regarding Authentication of Electronic Documents
evidence because there is no varying of the terms
shall apply. (Sec. 2, Rule 11)
of the written contract by extrinsic agreement for the execution of the written agreement.
the reason that there is no contract in existence. (Sec. 9)
There is nothing in which to apply the excluding
rule. Conditions subsequent may not be established c. DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN THE BEST EVIDENCE
by parol evidence since a written contract already RULE AND PAROL EVIDENCE RULE
exists.
Q: Distinguish parol evidence rule from best
a. APPLICATION OF THE PAROL EVIDENCE RULE evidence rule.
Q: What are the requisites for the application of A:

the parol evidence rule? PAROL EVIDENCE RULE BEST EVIDENCE RULE
The srcinal document is
Presupposes that the
A: not available or there is a
srcinal document is
1. There must be a valid contract; available in court dispute as toiswhether
writing srcinal said
2. The terms of the agreement must be
reduced to writing; Prohibits the introduction
3. The dispute is between the parties or their of secondary evidence in
Prohibits the varying of
successors-in-interest; and lieu of the srcinal
the terms of a written
document regardless of
4. There is dispute as to the terms of the agreement
whether or not it varies
agreement.
the contents of the
srcinal
b. WHEN PAROLE EVIDENCE CAN BE INTRODUCED
Applies only to documents
Applies to all kinds of
which are contractual in
Q: What is Parol Evidence Rule? writings
nature except wills
Can be invoked only when
A: It states that when the terms of an agreement the controversy is Can be invoked by any
have been reduced to writing, it is considered as between the parties to the party to an action whether
containing all the terms agreed upon and there can written agreement, their he has participated or not
be, between the parties and their successors-in- privies, or any party in the writing involved
interest, no evidence of such terms other than the affected thereby like a
contents of the written agreement (Sec. 9). cestui que trust
Note: Parol evidence rule does not apply, and may not 6. AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF DOCUMENTS
properly beother,
against the invoked by either
where at leastparty
one to thetolitigation
party the suit (RULE 132)
is not a party or privy of a party to the written Q: When is authentication of documents not
instrument in question and does not base a claim or required?
assert a right srcinating in the instrument of the
relation established thereby. Thus, if one of the parties A:
to the case is a complete stranger to the contract 1. The writing is an ancient document (Sec.
involved therein, he is not bound by this rule and can
21);
introduce extrinsic evidence against the efficacy of the
2. GR: The writing is a public document or
writing. (Lechugas v. CA et.al., G.R. Nos. L-39972 & L-
record (Sec. 19);
40300, Aug. 6, 1986)
XPN: A private document required by law to

Q: What are the exceptions to the parol evidence
rule?
be recorded – while they are public
documents, the public writing is not the
itig itself ut the puli eod
A: A party may present evidence to modify, explain
or add to the terms of the written agreement if he thereof. Such recording does not make the
puts in issue in his pleadings the following:
private writing itself a public document so
1. An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or as to make it admissible without
imperfection in the written agreement; authentication.
2. Failure of the written agreement to express
3. The writing is a notarial document
the true intent of the parties thereto; acknowledged, proved or certified (Sec. 30);
3. Validity of the written agreement; or
4. The authenticity and due execution of the
4. Existence of other terms agreed to by the
document has been expressly admitted or
parties or their successors in interest after
impliedly admitted by failure to deny the
same under oath; or
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
5. When such genuineness and due execution of its genuineness and due authentic is received
are immaterial to the issue. execution in evidence, its due
execution and
a. MEANING OF AUTHENTICATION authenticity must be
proved either:
Q: What is authentication?
By anyone who saw
the document
A: It is proving the due execution and genuineness
executed or written;
of the document.
or
By evidence of the
Q: What is document?
genuineness of the
A: It is a deed, instrument or other duly authorized signature or
paper by which something is proved, evidenced or handwriting of the
set forth. (Bermejo v. Barrios, G.R. No. L-23614, Feb. maker.
27, 1970)
Any other private
b. PUBLIC AND PRIVATE DOCUMENTS document need only
be identified as that
Q: What are public and private documents. which it is claimed to
be (Sec. 20).
A: Public documents are: As to persons bound
1. The written official acts, or records of the Binds only the parties
official acts of the sovereign authority, who executed them
Evidence even against third
official bodies and tribunals, and public or their privies,
persons, of the fact which
officers, whether of the Philippines, or of a insofar as due
gave rise to its due execution
foreign country; execution and date
and to the date of the latter
of the document are
2. Documents acknowledge before a notary
concerned
public except last wills and testaments; and
As to validity of certain transactions
3. Public records, kept in the Philippines, of
Certain transactions must be
private documents required by law to the
contained in a public
entered therein.
document; otherwise they
Note: All other writings are private. (Sec. 19)
will not be given any validity.
Q: Distinguish the classes of documents. Q: What are the rules in interpreting documents?
A:
A:
PUBLIC DOCUMENT PRIVATE DOCUMENT
1. The language of a writing is to be
What comprises it
interpreted according to the legal meaning
1. The written official acts,
it bears in the place of its execution, unless
or records of the official
acts of the sovereign
the parties intended otherwise.
authority, official bodies 2. Where there are several provisions or
and tribunals, and particulars, such a construction is, if
public officers, whether possible, to be adopted as will give effect to
of the Philippines, or of all.
a foreign country; 3. The intention of the parties is to be pursued;
2. Documents and when a general and a particular
All other writings are
acknowledged before a provision are inconsistent, the latter is
private (Sec. 19).
notary public except last paramount to the former. So a particular
wills and testaments; intent will control a general one that is
and inconsistent with it.
3. Public records, kept in 4. The circumstances under which it was
the Philippines, of made, including the situation of the subject
private documents
thereof and of the parties to it, may be
required by law to be
entered therein (Sec. shown, so that the judge may be placed in
the position of those whose language he is
19).
to interpret.
As to authenticity and admissibility as evidence
5. The terms of a writing are presumed to
Admissible as evidence Before any private
without need of further proof document offered as have been used in their primary and general

acceptation, but evidence is admissible to specimens of the questioned signatures with those
show that they have a local, technical, or of the currently existing ones (Pontaoe v. Pontaoe,
otherwise peculiar signification, and were G.R. No. 15958, Apr. 22, 2008).
so used and understood in the particular
instance, in which case the agreement must d. WHEN EVIDENCE OF AUTHENTICITY OF A
be construed accordingly. PRIVATE WRITING IS NOT REQUIRED (ANCIENT
6. When an instrument consists partly of DOCUMENTS)
written words and partly of a printed form,
and the two are inconsistent, the former Q: What are the requisites for an ancient
controls the latter. document to be exempt from proof of due
7. When the characters in which an execution and authenticity(rule on ancient
instrument is written are difficult to be ?
document/authentic document rule)
deciphered, or the language is not
understood by the court, the evidence of A:
persons skilled in deciphering the 1. The private document be more than 30
characters, or who understand the years old;
language, is admissible to declare the 2. That it be produced from a custody in which
characters or the meaning of the language. it would naturally be found if genuine; and
8. When the terms of an agreement have been 3. That it is unblemished by any alteration or
intended in a different sense by the circumstances of suspicion (Sec. 21).
different parties to it, that sense is to
prevail against either party in which he Note: Ancient document rule applies only if there are
supposed the other understood it, and no other witnesses to determine authenticity.
when different constructions of a provision
are otherwise equally proper, that is to be e. HOW TO PROVE GENUINENESS OF A
taken which is the most favorable to the HANDWRITING
party in whose favor the provision was
made. Q: Ho is the geuieess of a peso’s
9. When an instrument is equally susceptible handwriting proved?
of two interpretations, one in favor of
natural right and the other against it, the A:
former is to be adopted. 1. It may be proved by any witness who actually
10. An instrument may be construed according saw the person writing the instrument;
to usage, in order to determine its true

character (Secs. 10-19). 2. By any person
knowledge who
of the is familiar or
handwriting of has
suchacquired
person,
his opinion as to the handwriting being an
c. WHEN A PRIVATE WRITING REQUIRES exception to the opinion rule under Secs. 48
AUTHENTICATION; PROOF OF A PRIVATE WRITING & 50 of Rule 130;
3. By a comparison of the questioned
Q: Is the testimony of a handwriting expert handwriting from the admitted genuine
indispensable to the examination or the specimens thereof; or
comparison of handwritings in cases of forgery? 4. By expert witness (Secs. 20 & 22, Rule 132;
Sec. 49, Rule 130).
A: No. Handwriting experts are usually helpful in
the examination of forged documents because of f. PUBLIC DOCUMENTS AS EVIDENCE; PROOF OF
the technical procedure involved in analyzing them, OFFICIAL RECORD
but resort to these experts is not mandatory or
indispensable. Q: How are public records proved?
A finding of forgery does not depend entirely on the A: Written official acts, or records of the official acts
testimonies of handwriting experts, because the of the sovereign authority, official bodies and
judge must conduct an examination of the tribunals, and public officers, e.g. a written foreign
questioned signature in order to arrive at a law, may be evidenced by:
reasonable conclusion as to its authenticity. The 1. If it is within the Philippines
opinions of handwriting experts are not binding a. an official publication thereof; or
upon courts, especially when the question involved b. by a copy attested by the officer having
is mere handwriting similarity or dissimilarity, which the legal custody of the record, or by his
can be determined by a visual comparison of deputy.
2. If it is kept in a foreign country
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
a. an official publication thereof; or license to carry any firearm. The certifying officer,
b. by a copy attested by the officer having however, was not presented as a witness. Is the
the legal custody of the record, or by his certification of the PNP Firearm and Explosives
deputy and accompanied with a Office without the certifying officer testifying on it
certificate that such officer has the admissible in evidence against Lino?
custody. The certificate may be made by
a secretary of the embassy or legation, A: Yes. Section 28, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court
consul general, consul, vice consul, or provides that a itte stateet siged  a
consular agent or by any officer in the officer having the custody of an official record or by
foreign service of the Philippines his deputy that after diligent search, no record or
stationed in the foreign country in entry of a specified tenor is found to exist in the
which the record is kept, and records of his office, accompanied by a certificate
authenticated by the seal of his office as above provided, is admissible as evidence that
(Sec. 24, Rule 132). the records of his office contain no such record or
et.
Q: Is a special power of attorney executed and The records of the PNP Firearm and Explosives
acknowledged before a notary public in a foreign Office are a public record. Hence, notwithstanding
country authorizing a person to file a suit against that the certifying officer was not presented as a
certain persons in the Philippines admissible in witness for the prosecution, the certification he
evidence? made is admissible in evidence against Lino. (2003
Bar Question)
A: No, because a notary public in a foreign country
is not one of those who can issue the certificate g. ATTESTATION OF A COPY
mentioned in Sec. 24, Rule 132 of Rules of Court.
Non-compliance with the said rule will render the Q: What must the attestation of a copy state?
SPA inadmissible in evidence. Not being duly
established in evidence, the SPA cannot be used to A: Whenever a copy of a document or record is
file a suit in representation of another. The failure attested for the purpose of evidence, the
to have the SPA authenticated is not a mere attestation must state, in substance:
technicality but a question of jurisdiction. (Heirs of 1. That the copy is a correct copy of the srcinal,
Medina v. Natividad, G.R. No. 177505, Nov. 27, or a specific part thereof, as the case may be;
2008) 2. It must be under the official seal of the
attesting officer, if there be any, or if he be the
Q: May a public record be removed from its office? clerk of a court having a seal, under the seal of
such court.
A:
GR: No. Any public record must not be removed h. PUBLIC RECORD OF A PUBLIC DOCUMENT
from the office in which it is kept.
. Q: How may a public record of a private document
XPN: Upon order of a court where the be proved?
inspection of the record is essential to the just
determination of a pending case (Sec. 26, Rule A: Any of the following:
132). 1. By the srcinal record; or
2. By a copy thereof, attested by the legal
Q: What is the probative value of documents custodian of the record, with an
consisting of entries in public records? appropriate certificate that such officer has
the custody (Sec. 27, Rule 132).
A: They are prima facie evidence of the facts stated
therein if entered by a public officer in the i. PROOF OF LACK OF RECORD
performance of a duty. All other public documents
are evidence, even against a third person, of the Q: How may the absence of a record be proven?
fact which gave rise to their execution and of the
date of the latter (Sec. 23, Rule 132). A: Proof of lack of record of a document consists of
written statement signed by an officer having
Q: Lino was charged with illegal possession of custody of an official record or by his deputy. The
firearm. During trial, the prosecution presented in written statement must contain the following
evidence a certification of the PNP Firearms and matters:
Explosives Office attesting that the accused had no 1. There has been a diligent search of the record;

2. That despite the diligent search, no record of cards, Overseas Workers Welfare Administration
entry of a specified tenor is found to exist in OWWA IDs, OFW IDs, seaas ooks, alie
the records of his office. certificate of registrations/immigrant certificate of
registrations, government office IDs, certifications
Note: The written statement must be accompanied by from the National Council for the Welfare of Disabled
a certificate that such officer has the custody of official Persons (NCWDP), and DSWD certifications.
records (Sec. 28, Rule 132).
Notaries public are prohibited from notarizing
j. HOW A JUDICIAL RECORD IS IMPEACHED documents or instruments of signatories who are not
personally known to them or who otherwise fail to
present competent evidence of their respective
Q: How may a judicial record be impeached?
identities (A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC, Re: 2004 Rules on
Notarial Practice, Feb. 19, 2008).
A: It may be impeached by evidence of:
1. Want
officer;of jurisdiction in the court or judicial l. HOW TO EXPLAIN ALTERATIONS IN A
DOCUMENT
2. Collusion between the parties; or
3. Fraud in the party offering the record, in
Q: How should documents with alterations be
respect to the proceedings (Sec. 29).
presented as evidence for it to be admissible?
k. PROOF OF NOTARIAL DOCUMENTS

A: A party producing a document as genuine which
has been altered and appears to have been altered
Q: What is the evidentiary weight given to a
after its execution must account for the alteration.
notarial document?
He may show that the alteration:
1. was made by another, without his
A: Notarial documents celebrated with all the legal
concurrence;
requisites under a notarial certificate is evidence of
2. was made with the consent of the parties
a high character, and to overcome its recitals, it is
affected by it;
incumbent upon the party challenging it to prove
3. was otherwise properly or innocently made; or
his claim with clear, convincing and more than mere
4. that the alteration did not change the meaning
preponderant evidence.
or language of the instrument.
Note: Failure to do any of the above will make the
A notarized document carries the evidentiary document inadmissible in evidence (Sec. 31).
weight conferred upon it with respect to its due
execution, and it has in its favor the presumption of
regularity which may only be rebutted by evidence m. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN AN UNOFFICIAL
LANGUAGE
so strong and convincing as to exclude all
controversy as to the falsity of the certificate. Q: May a document be admitted into evidence if it
Absent such, the presumption must be upheld. The is written in an unofficial language?
burden of proof to overcome the presumption of
due execution of a notarial document lies on the A: Documents written in an unofficial language shall
one contesting the same (Pan Pacific Industrial not be admitted as evidence unless accompanied
Sales Co. v. CA, G.R. No.125283, Aug. 9, 2005). with a translation into English or Filipino (Sec. 32).
Q: How are notarial documents proved? E. TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE
A: The document may be presented in evidence 1. QUALIFICATIONS OF A WITNESS

without further proof, the certificate of
acknowledgment being prima facie evidence of the Q: Who are qualified to be witnesses?
execution of the instrument or document involved
(Sec. 30). A: All persons who:
1. can perceive and perceiving;
Note: The identification documents which may be
2. can make known their perception to
peseted as opetet eidee of idetit 
others (Sec. 20, Rule 130);
signatories to documents or instruments to be
notarized include, but are not limited to, passports, 3. must
(Sec. take either132;
1, Rule an oath or anEvidence:
Riano, affirmationA
dies lieses, Pofessioal ‘egulatios Coissio
identification cards, NBI clearances, police clearances, Restatement for the Bar, p. 245, 2009
postal IDs, otes IDs, Baaga etifiatios, G“I“ e - ed.); and
ads, “““ ads, Philhealth ads, seio itizes
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
4. must not possess the disqualifications capacity to

imposed by law or the rules (Riano, communicate his
Evidence: A Restatement for the Bar, p. perception to others.
246, 2009 ed.) (Riano, 2009, p.250)
NOTE: The ability to make known the perception of the Q: What is the rule on competency of witness?
witness to the court involves two factors: (a) the ability
to remember what has been perceived; and (b) the A: GR: A person who takes the witness stand is
ability to communicate the remembered perception. presumed to possess the qualifications of a
Consider a witness who has taken the oath and who witness. (Presumption of competency)
has personal knowledge of the event which he is going XPN: There is prima facie evidence of
to testify ( Riano, Evidence: A Restatement for the Bar, incompetency in the following:
p. 248, 2009 ed). 1. The fact that a person has been recently
Q: What are the qualifications of a witness? found of unsound

competent mind
jurisdiction; or by a court of
2. That one is an inmate of an asylum for the
A: A prospective witness must show that he has the insane.
following abilities:
1. To Observe – the testimonial quality of Q: What is the void dire examination?
perception;
2. To Remember – the testimonial quality of A: A preliminary examination conducted by the trial
memory; judge where the witness is duly sworn to answer as
3. To Relate – the testimonial quality of to his competency (Competency Examination).
narration; and
4. To Recognize a duty to tell the truth – the 3. DISQUALIFICATIONS OF WITNESSES
testimonial quality of sincerity.
Q: Who are disqualified to be witnesses under the
Q: What cannot be considered as grounds for rules?
disqualification?
A: Those who are:
A: GR: 1. Disqualified by reason of mental incapacity or
1. Religious or political belief; immaturity;
2. Interest in the outcome of the case; or 2. Disqualified by reason of marriage;
3. Conviction of a crime (Sec. 20). 3. Disqualified by reason of death or insanity of
XPN: Unless otherwise provided by law like the adverse party; and
following: 4. Disqualified on the ground of privileged
1. Those convicted of falsification of communication:
document, perjury or false testimony is a. Marital privilege;
prohibited from being witnesses to a will b. Attorney-client privilege;
(Art. 821, NCC). c. Doctor-patient privilege;
2. Those convicted of an offense involving d. Minister-penitent privilege; or
moral turpitude cannot be discharged to e. Public officer as regards communications
become a State witness (Sec. 17, Rule made in official confidence.
119; Sec. 10, R.A. 6981).
3. Those who fall under the disqualification Note: The qualifications and disqualifications of
provided under Secs. 21-24, Rule 130. witnesses are determined as of the time they are
produced for examination in court or at the taking of
2. COMPETENCY VS CREDIBILITY OF A WITNESS the depositions.
Q: Distinguish competency of a witness from a. DISQUALIFIED BY REASON OF MENTAL

credibility of a witness. INCAPACITY OR IMMATURITY
A: Q: What are the requisites for a witness to be

Competency of a disqualified under this rule?
Credibility of a Witness
Witness
Has reference to the Refers to the believability A:
basic qualifications of a of the witness and has 1. The proposed witness must be incapable
witness as his capacity nothing to do with the law of making known his perception to
to perceive and his or the rules. (Ibid). others; and
2. The incapacity must exist as of the time of presentation of the testimony of Cyrus on the
his production for examination (Riano, ground that, being a deaf-mute, he was not a
Evidence: A Restatement for the Bar, p. competent witness. Is the contention of the
254, 2009 ed.). accused correct?
Q: Who are disqualified by reason of mental A: No. A deaf-mute is not incompetent as a witness.
incapacity or immaturity? Deaf-mutes are competent witnesses where they
can:
A: 1. understand and appreciate the sanctity of
1. Mental incapacity – those whose mental an oath;
condition, at the time of their production 2. comprehend facts they are going to
for examination, is such that they are testify on; and
incapable of intelligently making known 3. communicate their ideas through a
their perception to others; he can still be qualified interpreter (People v. Tuangco,
a witness during his lucid interval. The G.R. No. 130331, Nov. 22, 2001).
disqualification is only absolute if the
insane person is publicly known to be b. DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF
insane and does not have lucid intervals. MARRIAGE/SPOUSAL IMMUNITY
2. Mental immaturity – children whose Q: What is purpose of this disqualification?

mental maturity is such as to render them
incapable of perceiving the facts A: The rule forbidding one spouse to testify for or
respecting which they are examined and against the other is based on principles which are
of relating them truthfully. (Sec. 21) deemed important to preserve the marriage
relation as one of full confidence and affection, and
Q: When must the incompetence of the witness by that this is regarded as more important to the
reason of mental incapacity or immaturity exist? public welfare than that the exigencies of the
lawsuits should authorize domestic peace to be
A: disregarded for the sake of ferreting out facts
Mental Incapacity Mental Immaturity within the knowledge of strangers.
The incompetence of the
witness must exist not at Q: What are the requisites in order for the spousal
the time of his perception The incompetence of immunity to apply?
of the
hefacts but at the
is produced fortime the witness
at the must
time the occur
witness A:
examination, and consists perceives the event 1. That the spouse for or against whom the
in his inability to including his testimony is offered is a party to the case;
intelligently make known incapability to relate his 2. That the spouses are validly married;
what he has perceived. perceptions truthfully. 3. The testimony is one that is offered
(Riano, Evidence: A (Ibid.)
during the existence of the marriage
Restatement for the Bar, p.
(Riano, Evidence: A Restatement for the
255, 2009 ed.)
Bar, p. 266, 2009 ed.); and
4. The case is not one of the exceptions
Q: Does mental unsoundness of the witness at the
provided in the rule. (Herrera, Vol. V, p.
time the fact to be testified occurred affect his
302, 1999 ed.)
competency?
Q: What kind of testimony is covered by the
A: No, it only affects his credibility. Nevertheless, as
prohibition?
long as the witness can convey ideas by words or
signs and can give sufficiently intelligent answers to
A: The prohibition extends not only to testimony
questions propounded, she is a competent witness
adverse to the spouse but also to a testimony in
even if she is feeble-minded (People v. De Jesus,
favor of the spouse. (Sec. 22, Rule 130; Riano,
G.R. No. L-39087, Apr. 27, 1984) or is mental
Evidence: A Restatement for the Bar, p. 265, 2009
retardate (People v. Gerones, G.R. No. 91116, Jan.
ed.)
24, 1991) or is a schizophrenic (People v. Baid, G.R.
No. 129667, July 31, 2000).
Note: It does not apply in the case of estranged
spouses, where the marital and domestic relations are
Q: Cyrus, a deaf-mute, was presented as a witness so strained that there is no more harmony to be
in a criminal case. The accused objected to the
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
preserved nor peace and tranquility which may be Q: Who can claim spousal immunity?
disturbed (Alvarez vs Ramirez, October 14, 2005)
A: The spouse who can object is the spouse-party
Q: What are the exceptions to the spousal and not the spouse-witness.
immunity?
A: Q: Gizelle was estranged from her husband Mico
1. In a civil case by one against the other; or for more than a year. Gizelle was temporarily
2. In a criminal case for a crime committed living with her sister in Pasig City. For unknown
 oe agaist the othe o the lattes easos, the house of I’s siste as ued,
direct descendants or ascendants (Sec. killing the latter. Gizelle survived.
22), or Gizelle saw her Mico in the vicinity during the
3. Where the testimony was made outside incident. Later, Mico was charged with arson.
the marriage. During the trial, the prosecutor called Gizelle to
the witness stand and offered her testimony to
Q: Can this be waived? prove that her husband committed arson. Can
Gizelle testify over the objection of her husband
A: This can be waived just like any other objection on the ground of marital privilege?
to the competency of other witnesses. It can be
waived through failure to interpose timely A: Yes. The marital disqualification rule is aimed at
objection of by calling the other spouse as a protecting the harmony and confidences of marital
witness. relations. Hence, where the marital and domestic
relations are so strained that there is no more
Q: If an accused marries the prosecution witness harmony to be preserved nor peace and tranquillity
for the sole purpose of sealing the lips of the which may be disturbed, the marital disqualification
witness, will the prohibition apply? no longer applies.
A: Yes. As long as a valid marriage exists at the time The act of Mico in setting fire to the house of his
of the trial, the witness-spouse cannot be sister-in-law, knowing that his wife was there, is an
compelled to testify even where the crime charged act totally alien to the harmony and confidences of
is agaist the itess peso, ad ee though the marital relation which the disqualification primarily
marriage was entered into for the express purpose seeks to protect. The criminal act complained of
of suppressing the testimony. had the effect of directly and vitally impairing the
conjugal relation. (Alvarez v. Ramirez, G.R. No.
Q: Distinguish spousal immunity from marital

privilege. 143439, Oct. 14, 2005). (2006 Bar Question)
c. DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF DEATH OR
A: INSANITY OF THE ADVERSE PARTY (DEAD MAN
Disqualification By STATUTE/SURVIVING PARTIES RULE)
Disqualification By Reason
Reason Of Marital
Of Marriage (Sec. 22)
Privilege (Sec. 24) Q: What are the elements for the application of
Can be claimed the rule?
Can be invoked only if one
whether or not the
of the spouses is a party to
other spouse is a party A:
the action
to the action
1. The defendant in the case is the executor
Applies only if the marriage Can be claimed even
or the administrator or a representative
is existing at the time the after the marriage is
testimony is offered dissolved of the deceased or the person of unsound
Applies only to mind;
Constitutes an absolute 2. The case is against the executor or the
confidential
prohibition for or against administrator or a representative of the
communications
the spouse of the witness deceased or the person of unsound mind;
between the spouses
The married person is 3. The subject matter of the action is a claim
The married witness would
on the stand but the or demand against the estate of a
not be allowed to take the
objection of privilege is deceased person or a person of unsound
stand at all because of the
disqualification. Even if the raised when
confidential marital 4. mind;
The and
testimony is as to any matter of fact
testimony is, for or against
communication is occurring before the death of such
the objecting spouse.
inquired into deceased person or before such person

became of unsound mind. (Sec. 23, Rule 8. Negative testimony, that is, testimony
130) that a fact did not occur during the
lifetime of the deceased;
Q: What is covered by the disqualification by 9. Testimony on the present possession by
reason of death or insanity of the adverse party? the witness of a written document signed
by the deceased because such fact exists
A: It constitutes a partial disqualification of a even after the death of decedent;
witness wherein he is prohibited from testifying as 10. When the defendant/s, though heirs of
to any matter of fact occurring before the death or the deceased, are sued in their personal
insanity of a party to the transaction. and individual capacities; and
11. In actions against a partnership.
Note: The witness cannot testify on matters which
occurred in the presence and within the hearing of the Q: Can this be waived?
decedent
knowledgetoif which he might
he were alive. testify on his personal
Facts favorable to the A: The disqualification under this rule is waived if
deceased or insane person or their representatives are the defendant does not timely object to the
not prohibited.
admission of such evidence or testifies on the
prohibited matters or cross-examines thereon.
Q: What is the reason underlying the adoption of
the dead man statute?
Q: Distiguish dead a’s statute fo aital
disqualification rule.
A: To guard against the temptation to give false
testimony in regard of the transaction in question A:
on the part of the surviving party and to discourage Marital Disqualification
perjury. Dead Ma’s “tatute
Rule
Only a partial
Q: What are the cases not covered by the dead disqualification as the
man statute? witness is not completely
A complete and absolute
disqualified but is only
disqualification
A: prohibited from testifying
1. Testimony of mere witnesses who are on the matters therein
neither party plaintiffs, nor their specified
assignors, nor persons in whose behalf a GR: Applies to a civil or
case is prosecuted, nor to a nominal criminal case.
party, nor to officers and stockholders of Applies only to a civil XPN: In a civil case by one
a plaintiff corporation; spouse against the other
case or special
2. If the person or persons mentioned under or in a criminal case for a
proceeding over the
the rule file a counterclaim ; crime committed by one
estate of a deceased or
spouse against the other
3. Where the deceased contracted with the insane person
o the lattes diet
plaintiff through an agent and said agent
descendants or
is alive and can testify, but the testimony
ascendants
of the plaintiff should be limited to acts
performed by the agent;
d. DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF PRIVILEGED
4. Land registration cases instituted by the
COMMUNICATION
deeaseds epesetatie, hee the
oppositor is considered as defendant or in
Q: Who may assert the privilege?
cadastral cases where there are no
oppositors;
A: The holder of the privilege, authorized persons
5. When there is waiver;
and persons to whom privileged communication
6. If the plaintiff is the executor or
were made can assert the privilege.
administrator or other representative of a
deceased person, or the person of
Note: The disqualification applies to both civil and
unsound mind; criminal casesexcept as to the doctor-patient privilege,
7. When the testimony refers to fraudulent which is applicable only in civil cases. Unless waived,
transactions committed by the persons the disqualification under Sec. 24 remains even after
mentioned in the rule , provided such the various relationships therein have ceased to exist.
fraud is first established by other The privilege cannot be invoked where confidential
evidence; information are made in contemplation of death or in
furtherance or perpetuation of fraud. Unless waived,
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
the disqualification under Sec. 24 remains even after A:

the various relationships therein have ceased to exist. 1. Attorney-client relation;
2. The privilege is invoked with respect to a
(1) HUSBAND AND WIFE confidential communication between
them in the course of professional
Q: What are the requisites for the application of employment; and
this privilege? 3. The client has not given his consent to the
attoes testio; o if the attoes
A: secretary, stenographer or clerk is sought
1. There was a valid marriage; to be examined, that both the client and
2. The privilege is invoked with respect to a the attorney have not given their consent.
confidential communication between the (Regalado, Vol. II, p. 749, 2008 ed.)
spouses during the said marriage; and
3. The spouse
is being against
offered whom
has not such
given hisevidence
consent
Q: What is the purpose of this privilege?
to such testimony. A: To encourage full disclosure by client to his
attorney of all pertinent matters as to further the
Q: When is the privilege inapplicable? administration of justice.
A: Q: When is the privilege inapplicable?

1. In a civil case by one against the other; or
2. In a criminal case for a crime committed A: It does not apply to communications which are:
by one against the other or the lattes 1. intended to be made public;
direct ascendants or descendants. 2. intended to be communicated to others;
3. intended for an unlawful purpose;
Q: Are third persons who overhear the 4. received from third persons not acting in
communication between the spouses bound by behalf or as agents of the client; or
the privilege? 5. made in the presence of third parties who
are strangers to the attorney-client
A: relationship. (Regalado, Vol. II, p. 750,
GR: Third persons who, without the knowledge 2008 ed.)
of the spouses, overhear the communication
are not disqualified to testify. Q: What is the test in applying the attorney-client
XPN: Whento there

disclosure is collusion
a third andthird
party, that voluntary
party privilege?
becomes an agent and cannot testify. A: The test is whether the communication made is
with the view of obtaining from the lawyer his
Q: Distinguish marital privilege from professional assistance or advice regardless of the
disqualification by reason of marriage. existence or absence of a pending litigation.
A: Q: May a lawyer refuse to divulge the identity of

Disqualification by reason his clients?
Marital privilege
of marriage
Can be invoked only if one Can be claimed whether or A:
of the spouses is a party to not the spouse is a party to GR: Lawyers may not invoke the privilege and
the action the action refuse to divulge the name or identity of their
Can be claimed even after client.
Applies only if the marriage
the marriage has been XPNs:
is existing at the time the
dissolved 3. Where a strong possibility exists that
testimony is offered
eealig liets ae ould ipliate
Constitutes a total Applies only to confidential
the client in the very activity for which he
prohibition against the communications between
spouse of the witness the spouses sought the laes adie;
4. Where disclosure would open the client
to civil liability; or
(2) ATTORNEY AND CLIENT 5. Where the prosecutors have no case
Q: What are the requisites for the application of
against the client unless by revealing the
liets ae, the said ae ould
the privilege?
furnish the only link that would form the

chain of testimony necessary to convict A: The privilege is intended to facilitate and make
an individual for a crime. safe, full and confidential disclosure by patient to
doctor of all facts, circumstances, and symptoms,
Q: A tugboat owned by Speedy Port Service, Inc. untrammeled by apprehension of their subsequent
(SPS) sank in Manila Bay while helping to tow and enforced disclosure and publication on the
another vessel, drowning 5 of the crew in the witness stand, to the end that the physician may
resulting shipwreck. At the maritime board form a correct opinion, and be enabled safely and
inquiry, the 4 survivors testified. SPS engaged Atty. efficaciously to treat his patient.
Ely to defend against potential claims and to sue
the company owning the other vessel for damages Q: When is the privilege inapplicable?
to the tug. Ely obtained signed statements from
the survivors. He also interviewed other persons, A: It does not apply to communications which are:
in some instance making memoranda. The heirs of 1. Not given in confidence;
the 5 victims filed an action for damages against 2. Irrelevant to the professional
SPS. employment;
The counsel of the heirs of the 5 victims sent 3. Made for an unlawful purpose;
written interrogatories to Ely, asking whether 4. Intended to be made public; or
statements of the witnesses may be obtained. Ely 5. Waived either by contract or law.
refused to comply, arguing that the documents (Regalado, Vol. II, p. 751, 2008 ed.)
and information asked are privileged
communication. Is the contention tenable? Q: What are the pieces of information which
Explain. cannot be disclosed?
A:
A: Yes, the contention of counsel for SPS is tenable 1. Any advice or treat given to the client;
considering that he was acting in his professional 2. Any information acquired in attending
capacity in bringing about the statement he such patient provided that the advice,
obtained from the witnesses and the memoranda treatment or information was made or
he made. The notes, memoranda, and writings acquired in a professional capacity and
made by the counsel in pursuance of his was necessary to enable him to act in that
professional duty, form part of his private and capacity; and
confidential files in the cases handled by him; hence 3. That the information sought to be
privileged (Air Philippines Corp v. Penswell, Inc., G.R. disclosed would tend to blacken the
No. 172835, Dec. 13, 2007). reputation of the patient. (Sec. 24c, Rule
(3) PHYSICIAN AND PATIENT 130)

Q: Can such privilege be waived?
Q: What are the requisites for the application of
the privilege? A: Yes. The waiver may be made expressly or
impliedly. The waiver may be by a contract as in
A: medical or life insurance. When there is disclosure
1. The action involves a civil case; by the patient of the information, there is
2. The relation of physician and patient necessarily, a waiver. When the patient answers
existed between the person claiming the questions on cross on matters which are
privilege or his legal representative and supposedly privileged, the waiver also exists. There
the physician; could also be waiver by operation of law (sec4, Rule
3. The advice or treatment given by him or 28 of the Rules of Court) (Riano, p.292).
any information was acquired by the
physician while professionally attending Q: Is it necessary that the professional relationship
to the patient; exists between the doctor and patient when the
4. The information was necessary for the communication was made?
performance of his professional duty; and
5. The disclosure of the information would A: Yes. It is essential that while the doctor was
tend to blacken the reputation of the attending to the patient for curative, preventive or
patient. palliative treatment. It is not however necessary
that the relationship was created through the
Q: What is the purpose of this privilege? voluntary act of the patient. The treatment may
have been given at the behest of another. (Ibid.)
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
Q: Aimee sought to offer as evidence the privilege is claimed is not one duly authorized to
testimony of Dr. Naval to prove that Bob is not the practice medicine, surgery obstetrics.
illegitimate son of Yuring as the latter was sterile. Xavier is simply Ysa's husband who wishes to testify
Bob objected to the admissibility of the said on a document executed by medical practitioners.
testimony arguing that the same is covered by the This does not fall within the claimed prohibition.
physician-patient privilege because the testimony Neither can his testimony be considered a
would blacken the reputation of Yuring. It was circumvention of the prohibition because his
alleged that Yuring became sterile because he testimony cannot have the force and effect of the
contracted gonorrhea. Aimee argues that Yuring is testimony of the physician who examined the
long dead and, as such, the privilege may not be patient and executed the report (Krohn v. CA, G.R.
invoked. No. 108854, June 14, 1994).
1. Is the testimony of Dr. Naval covered by
the physician-patient privilege? (4) PRIEST AND PENITENT
2. Does the fact that Yuring is long dead bar
the application of the physician-patient Q: What are the requisites for its application?
privilege?
A:
A: 1. The confession must have been made to
1. Yes. Yuring's sterility arose when he the priest in his professional character
contracted gonorrhea, a fact which most according to the discipline of the church
assuredly blackens his reputation. In fact, to which the priest or minister belongs
given that society holds virility at a [Sec. 24(d)]; and
premium, sterility alone, without the 2. Communications made must be
attendant embarrassment of contracting confidential and must be penitential in
a sexually-transmitted disease, would be character e.g., under the seal of the
sufficient to blacken the reputation of any confessional (Regalado, Vol. II, p. 752,
patient (Gonzales v. CA, G.R. No. 117740, 2008 ed.)
Oct. 30, 1998).
Q: What is the purpose of this privilege?
2. No. The privilege of secrecy is not
abolished or terminated because of A: To allow and encourage individuals to fulfill their
death. The purpose of the law would be religious, emotional or other needs by protecting
thwarted and the policy intended to be confidential disclosures to religious practitioners.
promoted thereby
death removed thewould
seal ofbesecrecy,
defeated, if
from Q: When is the privilege inapplicable?
the communications and disclosures
which a patient should make to his A: When the communication is not penitential in
physician. After one has gone to his grave, character as when what is divulged is the plan to
the living are not permitted to impair his commit a crime.
name and disgrace his memory by
dragging to light communications and Q: What is the rationale behind the privilege
disclosures made under the seal of the granted to communications between
statute (Gonzales v. CA, G.R. No. 117740, minister/priest and the penitent?
Oct. 30, 1998).
A: It is to allow and encourage individuals to fulfill
Q: Xavier filed a complaint for declaration of their religious, emotional or other needs by
nullity of his marriage with Ysa on the ground of protecting confidential disclosures to religious
psychological incapacity. Xavier sought to testify practitioners (Peralta, Jr., p. 220, 2005 ed.).
on a confidential psychiatric evaluation report on
his wife. Ysa objeted to Xaie’s testio o the (5) PUBLIC OFFICERS
ground that it violates the physician-patient
privilege. Is the objection of Ysa correct? Q: What are the requisites for its application?
A: No. One of the requisites before the physician- A:

patient privilege may be invoked is that the person 1. The communication must have been
against whom the privilege is claimed is one duly made to a public officer;
authorized to practice medicine, surgery or 2. The communication was given to the
obstetrics. Here, the person against whom the public officer in official confidence; and

3. The public interest would suffer by the e. PARENTAL AND FILIAL PRIVILEGE RULE
disclosure of the communication.
(Regalado, Vol. II, p. 752, 2008 ed.) Q: May a descendant be compelled to testify
against his parents in a criminal case?
Q: When is the privilege inapplicable?
A: No, because no person may be compelled to
A: If what is asked: testify against his parents, other direct ascendants,
1. is useful evidence to vindicate the children or other direct descendants (Sec. 25).
innocence of an accused; A descendant may not be compelled to testify
2. lessen the risk of false testimony; against his parents notwithstanding Article 215 of
3. is essential to the proper disposition of the Family Code which allows the compulsion of a
the litigation; or descendant to testify against his parents when such
4. the benefit to be gained by a correct testimony is indispensable in a crime against the
disposition of the litigation was greater descendant or by one against the other. Any
than any injury which could inure to the conflict between the two provisions should be
relation by a disclosure of the resolved in favor of the Rules of Court provision
information. (Francisco, p. 171, 1992 ed.) because although found in a substantive law, the
aforesaid Family Code provision is essentially
Q: Is the privilege applicable to public officer in procedural in nature.
general?
Alternative Answer:
A: No. The privilege only applies to communications Yes. Article 215 of the Family Code provides that
to such officers who have a responsibility or duty to No descendant shall be compelled, in a criminal
investigate or to prevent public wrongs, and not to case, to testify against his parents and
officials in general (Francisco, p. 139, 1992 ed.). grandparents, except when such testimony is
indispensable in a crime against the descendant or
Note: The court, not the witness, will determine the  oe agaist the othe. The paetal ad filial
necessity of regarding the communication as privileged privilege under the Rules of Court notwithstanding,
(Francisco, p. 143, 1992 ed.) . it is submitted that the Family Code is superior to
the former since a procedural rule of evidence
Q: What is the concept of executive privilege? cannot impair a substantive law. Hence, a
descendant may be compelled to testify against his
A: Certain types of information like military, parents if such testimony is indispensable in a crime
diplomatic and other national security matters may
be withheld from the public. against the descendant or by one against the other.
Q: Which should be applied between Rule 130,
Q: Secretary of Fisheries Nenito Abesamis received Sec. 25 of the Rules of Court and Art. 215 of the
an invitation for questioning in a hearing from the Family Code in case of conflict?
Senate of the Philippines regarding Fish Feeds
“a. Duig the heaig, Aesais did’t ase A: It was suggested that the Rules of Court should
the questions propounded to him by Senator apply because it took effect in 1989 as compared
Renato Pamintuan claiming that his position to the Family Code which took effect in 1988. It
entitles him to invoke the executive privilege. Is may be argued that the former is procedural and
his contention correct? the latter is substantive; however, it was further
suggested that although the Family Code provision
A: No. As held in the case of Senate of the is substantive, it is procedural in character. So, of
Philippines vs. Ermita, (G.R. No. 169777, April 25, these two provisions, the Rules of Court,
2006). The Court upheld the doctrine of executive promulgated by the Supreme Court, should
privilege; it found the executive order partly prevail.
constitutionally defective, specifically Secs. 2(b) and
3 which required government officials below the OTHER PRIVILEGED MATTERS
heads of executive departments to secure consent
from the President before appearing in Q: What other matters are considered privileged?
congressional hearings and investigations. The
Court noted that E.O. 464 covers persons which are A:
a misuse of the doctrine because the privilege is to 1. The guardian ad litem shall not testify in
be properly invoked in relation to specific any proceeding concerning any
categories of information and not categories of information, statement, or opinion
persons. (Riano, 2009 ed., p. 298)
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
received from the child in the course of admitted in his testimony, e.g. under Sec. 8,
serving as a guardian ad litem, unless the R.A. 1379, the law providing for the
court finds it necessary to promote the forfeiture of unlawfully acquired property;
best interests of the child [Sec. 5 (e), Rule and under P.D. 749, in prosecutions for
on Examination of a Child Witness]; bribery and graft.
2. Editors, publisher, or duly accredited 5. Not to give an answer, which will tend to
reporter of any newspaper, magazine or degrade his reputation, unless it be to the
periodical of general circulation cannot be very fact at issue or to a fact from which
compelled to reveal the source of any the fact in issue would be presumed. But
news report or any information given to a witness must answer to the fact of his
him in confidence, unless a court or a previous final conviction for an offense
House or a committee of Congress finds (Sec. 3).
that such revelation is demanded for
State security (R.A. 1477); Q: What are the classifications of immunity
statutes?
3. Voters may not be compelled to disclose
for whom they voted;
4. Trade secrets cannot be disclosed A:
although this is not absolute as the court Use Immunity Transactional Immunity
may compel disclosure where it is Prohibits the use of the Grants immunity to the
indispensable for doing justice (Francisco, witness' compelled witness from
p. 335, 1992 ed.); testimony and its fruits in prosecution for an
5. Bank deposits are absolutely confidential any manner in connection offense to which his
with the criminal compelled testimony
in nature except upon written permission
prosecution of the witness relates
of the depositor, or in cases of
impeachment, or upon lawful order of a
Q: May a witness refuse to answer questions
competent court (R.A. 1405; Francisco, p.
material to the inquiry?
335, 1992 ed.);
6. Conciliators and similar officials shall not
A:
testify in any court or body regarding any
GR: A witness cannot refuse to answer
matter taken up at the conciliation
questions. The witness has the obligation to
proceedings conducted by them (Art. 233,
answer questions, although his answer may
Labor Code); and
tend to establish a claim against him (Sec. 3).
7. Informers, for the protection of their
identity, cannot bewhen

by the prosecutor compelled to testify
their testimony XPN: A witness may validly refuse to answer
under the:
would merely be cumulative and
1. Right against self-incrimination – if his
corroborative (Herrera, Vol. V, p. 353,
answer will tend to subject him to
1999 ed.).
punishment for an offense; or
2. Right against self-degradation – if his
4. EXAMINATION OF A WITNESSES
answer will have a direct tendency to
degrade his character.
a. RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF A WITNESS
XPN to the XPN:A witness may not invoke the

Q: What are the rights of a witness?
right against self-incrimination nor the right
A:
against self-degradation if:
1. To be protected from irrelevant,
1. Such question is directed to the very fact
improper, or insulting questions, and
at issue or to a fact from which the fact at
from harsh or insulting demeanor;
issue would be presumed; or
2. Not to be detained longer than the
2. If it refers to his previous final conviction
interests of justice require;
for an offense. (Regalado, Vol. II, pp. 841-
3. Not to be examined except only as to
842, 2008 ed.)
matters pertinent to the issue;
4. Not to give an answer which will tend to
Note: Right against self-incrimination pertains only to
subject him to a penalty for an offense
unless otherwise provided by law (right natural persons and with respect to testimonial
compulsion only. This right may be invoked in all kinds
against self-incrimination) of proceedings where testimony is to be taken,
Note: This refers to immunity statutes including investigation by legislative bodies.
wherein the witness is granted immunity
from criminal prosecution for offenses
The constitutional assurance of the right against self- committees their power of inquiry. (In Re: Sabio,
incrimination is a prohibition against the use of G.R. No. 174340, Oct. 17, 2006).
physical or moral compulsion to extort
communications from the accused. It is simply a Q: Is the right against self-incrimination available
prohibition against legal process to extract from the to a witness who has been admitted to the
auseds o lips, agaist his ill, adissio of his Witness Protection Program?
guilt (Ong v. Sandiganbayan & Office of the
Ombudsman, G.R. No. 126858, Sept. 16, 2005).
A: Any witness admitted into the program of the
Witness Protection, Security and Benefit Act cannot
Q: Distinguish the right against self-incrimination
refuse to testify or give evidence or produce books,
of the accused from that of an ordinary witness.
documents, records or writings necessary for the
prosecution of the offense or offenses for which he
A:
has been admitted into the Program on the ground
Accused Ordinary Witness
Cannot be compelled to of the constitutional right against self-incrimination
but he shall enjoy immunity from criminal
testify or produce evidence
May be compelled to prosecution and cannot be subjected to any penalty
in the criminal case in which
testify by subpoena, or forfeiture for any transaction, matter or thing
he is the accused or one of
having only the right concerning his compelled testimony or books,
the accused, he cannot be
to refuse to answer a documents, records and writings produced (Sec. 14,
compelled to do so even by
particular R.A. 6981).
subpoena or other process
incriminating question
or order of the court. He
at the time it is put to
cannot be required either Q: Who may be admitted to the Witness
him.
for the prosecution, for co- Protection, Security and Benefit Program?
accused or even for himself.
A: Any person who has witnessed or has knowledge
Q: May a witness refuse to take the witness stand? or information on the commission of a crime and
has testified or is testifying or about to testify
A: before any judicial or quasi-judicial body, or before
GR: A witness may not refuse to take the any investigating authority may be admitted
witness stand. provided that:
XPNs: 1. the offense in which his testimony will be
1. An accused in a criminal case; or used is a grave felony as defined under
2. In civil and administrative cases that the Revised Penal Code, or its equivalent
partake
criminal the nature of
proceeding. Asor analogous
long to isa
as the suit 2. under special laws;can be substantially
his testimony
criminal in nature, the party thereto can corroborated in its material points;
decline to take the witness stand. It is not 3. he or any member of his family within the
the character of the suit involved but the second civil degree of consanguinity or
nature of the proceedings that controls affinity is subjected to threats to life or
(Rosete, et. al. v. Lim, et. al., G.R. No. bodily injury or there is a likelihood that
136051, June 8, 2006). he will be killed, forced, intimidated,
harassed or corrupted to prevent him
Q: Mr. Talisman, a government official, was invited from testifying, or to testify falsely, or
by the Senate to be one of the resource persons in evasively, because or on account of his
the public hearing in one of its committees. When testimony; and
Mr. Talisman declined the invitation, the Senate 4. he is not a law enforcement officer, even
directed its sergeant-at-arms to place him under if he would be testifying against the other
arrest for contempt. He was arrested and brought law enforcement officers. In such a case,
to the Senate where he was detained. He filed a only the immediate members of his family
petition forcertiorari and prohibition alleging that may avail themselves of the protection
his right against self-incrimination was violated. Is provided for under the Act (Sec. 3, R.A.
his contention correct? 6981).
A: No. The right against self-incrimination may only Q: Who is a State witness?
be invoked when the incriminating question is
being asked, since he has no way of knowing in A: Any person who has participated in the
advance the nature or effect of the questions to be commission of a crime and desires to be a witness
asked. That this right may possibly be violated or for the State, can apply and shall be admitted into
abused is no ground for denying respondent senate
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
the Program if the following circumstances are A:

present:
1. the offense in which his testimony will be

used is a grave felony as defined under
the Revised Penal Code or its equivalent
under special laws;
2. there is absolute necessity for his
testimony;
3. there is no other direct evidence available
for the proper prosecution of the offense
committed;
4. his testimony can be substantially
corroborated on its material points;
5. he does not appear to be most guilty; and
6. he has not at any time been convicted of
any crime involving moral turpitude.
Note: An accused discharged from an information or

criminal complaint by the court in order that he may
be a State Witness pursuant to Section 9 and 10 of
Rule 119 of the Revised Rules of Court may upon his
petition be admitted to the Program under R.A. 6981 if
he complies with the other requirements of the said
law. R.A. 6981 does not prevent the discharge of an
accused, so that he can be used as a State Witness
under Rule 119 of the Rules of Court (Sec. 10, R.A.
6981).
Q: Can a State witness be liable for contempt or

criminal prosecution?
A: Yes, if he fails or refuses to testify or to continue

to testify without just cause when lawfully obliged
to do so, he shall be prosecuted for contempt. If he
testifies falsely or evasively, he shall be liable to
prosecution for perjury. If a State witness fails or Q: What are the purposes of each stage of the
refuses to testify, or testifies falsely or evasively, or examination?
violates any condition accompanying such immunity
without just cause, as determined in a hearing by A:
the proper court, his immunity shall be removed 1. Direct examination – To establish the case
and he shall be subject to contempt or criminal of the proponent of the witness. The
prosecution. Moreover, the enjoyment of all rights pupose is to eliit fats aout the liets
and benefits under R.A. 6981 shall be deemed cause of action or defense.
terminated. The witness may, however, purge
himself of the contumacious acts by testifying at 2. Cross examination – As a rule, the scope
any appropriate stage of the proceedings (Sec. 13, of this is not confined to the matters
R.A. 6981). stated by the witness in the direct
examination. (Riano, p. 318). The purpose
b. ORDER IN THE EXAMINATION OF A WITNESS of which is:
(1) DIRECT EXAMINATION a. To impeach the credibility of the
(2) CROSS EXAMINATION testimony;
(3) RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION b. To impeach the credibility of the
(4) RE-CROSS EXAMINATION witness;
c. To elicit admissions; and
Q: What is the order in the examination of an d. To clarify certain matters.
individual witness?
3. Redirect examination – The counsel may
elicit testimony to correct or repel any

wrong impression or inferences that may XPN: Where the prosecution witness was
have been created. It may also be an extensively cross-examined on the material points
opportunity to rehabilitate a witness and thereafter failed to appear and cannot be
whose credibility has been damaged produced despite a warrant of his arrest. (People vs
(Riano, p.319). Its purposes are: Gorospe, gr. 51513, May 15, 1984)
a. To afford opportunity to the witness
to explain or amplify his testimony Q: What is the effect of death or absence of a
during cross-examination; and witness after the direct examination by the
b. To explain any apparent proponent?
contradiction or inconsistency in his
statements. A:
1. If the witness was not cross-examined
4. Re-cross examination – It is limited to the because of causes attributable to the
new matters brought out on the redirect cross-examining party and the witness
examination of the witness and also on had always made himself available for
such other matters as may be allowed by cross-examination, the direct testimony
the court in its discretion. The purposes of the witness shall remain on record and
are: cannot be stricken off because the cross-
a. To oeoe the popoets examiner is deemed to have waived his
attempt to rehabilitate the witness; right to cross-examine (Dela Paz v. IAC,
and G.R. No. 75860, Sept. 17, 1987).
b. To rebut damaging evidence brought 2. If the witness was partially cross-
out during cross-examination. examined but died before the completion
of his cross-examination, his testimony on
Q: What is the scope of a cross-examination? direct may be stricken out but only with
A: respect to the testimony not covered by
1. English rule – Where a witness is called to the cross-examination (People v. Señeris,
testify to a particular fact, he becomes a G.R. No. L-48883, Aug. 6, 1980).
witness for all purposes and may be fully 3. The absence of a witness is not sufficient
cross-examined upon all matters material to warrant the striking out of his
to the issue, the examination not being testimony for failure to appear for further
confined to the matters inquired about in cross-examination where the witness has
the direct examination. already been sufficiently cross-examined,
2. American rule – Cross-examination is and the matter

examination on which
is sought is notcross-
in
restricted to facts and circumstances controversy (Ibid.).
which are connected with the matters
that have been stated in the direct Q: Is the party who offered the testimony of a
examination of the witness. witness bound by such testimony?
Q: What rule is observed in our jurisdiction? A:

GR: Yes, he is bound by the testimony.
A:
GR: The English rule is observed in our XPN: When the witness is the:
jurisdiction. 1. adverse party;
XPN: The American rule is observed with 2. hostile witness;
respect to cross-examination of an accused or a 3. unwilling witness; or
hostile witness. 4. a witness required by law to be presented
(forced witness)
Q: What is the Doctrine of Incomplete Testimony?
Q: Who is a hostile witness?
A:
GR: When cross-examination cannot be done or A: A witness may be considered as unwilling or
completed due to causes attributable to the party hostile only if so declared by the court upon
who offered the witness, the incomplete testimony adequate showing of his adverse interest,
is rendered incompetent and should be stricken unjustified reluctance to testify or his having misled
from the record. the party into calling him to the witness stand (Sec.
12).
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
(5) RECALLING THE WITNESS he has previously stated. It is not allowed (Sec. 10)
unless waived or when asking hypothetical
Q: What is the rule on recalling of a witness? questions to an expert witness. It is not allowed in
any type of examination.
A:
GR: A witness cannot be recalled without leave d. METHODS OF IMPEACHMENT OF ADVERSE
of court as the recalling of a witness is a matter PARTY
of judicial discretion. (Sec. 9, Rule 132)
XPN: Q: What is impeachment of a witness?
1. The examination has not been concluded;
2. If the recall of the witness was expressly A: It is a technique employed usually as part of
reserved by a party with the approval of cross-eaiatio to disedit a itess testio
the court. In these two cases the recall of by attacking his credibility. (Riano, Evidence: A
a witness is a matter of right. (Regalado, Restatement for the Bar, p. 323, 2009 ed.)
Vol. II, p. 848, 2008 ed.)
Note: Something more than the bare assertion of the Q: What is meant by impeachment of the adverse
need to propound additional questions is essential party as a witness?
before the court's discretion may rightfully be
exercised to grant or deny recall. There must be a A: That the witness is the adverse party does not
satisfactory showing of some concrete, substantial necessarily mean that the calling party will not be
ground for the recall. oud  the foes testio. The fat eais
that it was at his instance that his adversary was
c. LEADING AND MISLEADING QUESTIONS
put on the witness stand. He is not bound only in
the sense that he may contradict him by
Q: What is leading question?
introducing other evidence to prove a state of facts
contrary to what the witness testifies. Unlike an
A: It is one which suggests to the witness the
ordinary witness, the calling party may impeach an
answer which the examining party desires. It is not adverse witness in all respects as if he had been
allowed except: called by the adverse party, except by evidence of
1. On cross-examination; his bad character. Under a rule permitting the
2. On preliminary matters; impeachment of an adverse witness, although the
3. When there is difficulty in getting direct and allig pat does ot ouh fo the itess
intelligible answers from a witness who is veracity, he is nonetheless bound by his testimony
ignorant, or a child of tender years, or is of
feeble mind or a deaf-mute; if
v. itChua,
is notG.R.
contradicted or April
No. 160855, remains
16, unrebutted
2008) ( Gaw
4. To unwilling witness or hostile witness; or
5. Witness is an adverse party or an officer, Q: What are the methods to impeach the adverse
director, or managing agent of a public or pat’s itess?
private corporation or of a partnership or
association which is an adverse party. (Sec. A:
10).
BY EVIDENCE THAT
BY PRIOR
HIS GENERAL
Q: Why are leading questions allowed during BY INCONSISTEN
REPUTATION FOR
cross-examination? CONTRADICT T
TRUTH, HONESTY,
ORY STATEMENTS
OR INTEGRITY OF
EVIDENCE LAYING THE
A: The witness is not the cross- eaiig pats THE WITNESS IS
PREDICATE"
witness. He is expected to be adverse or hostile to BAD
the cross-examiner. He is not expected to Refers to the Since the weight of Refer to
cooperate. prior the itess statements,
Note: A question that merely suggests a subject testimony of testimony depends oral or
without suggesting an answer or a specific thing is not the same on his credibility, he documentary,
a leading question. E.g. “tate hethe athig witness or may be impeached made by the
transpired between you and the defendants on the other by impairing his witness
17th of Ma . evidence credibility by sought to be
presented
him in theby showing
pleasing his not
reputation impeached
occasionson
Q: What is misleading question?
same case, but only as regards other than
A: It is one which assumes as true a fact not yet but not the his reputation for the trial in
testified to by the witness, or contrary to that which testimony of truth, honesty or which he is
other witness integrity testifying
Q: May a witness be impeached by evidence of not merely to impeach him, the rule on laying the
particular wrongful acts? predicate does not apply.
A: Q: What are the elements of laying the predicate?

GR: A witness may not be impeached by
evidence of particular wrongful acts. A:
XPN: If it may be shown by the examination of 1. The alleged statements must be related
the witness, or the record of the judgment, that to the witness including the
he has been convicted of an offense (Sec. 11). circumstances of the times and places and
the persons present. If the statements are
Q: What are the other modes of impeachment? in writing they must beshown to him;
2. He must be asked whether he made such
A: statements and also to explain them if he
1. By showing improbability or admits

p. 327).
making those statements (Riano,
unreasonableness of testimony;
2. By showing bias, prejudice, and hostility;
3. By prior inconsistent acts or conduct; Q: When is the rule on laying the predicate
4. By showing social connections, inapplicable?
occupation and manner of living; or
5. By showing interest. (Francisco, pp. 480- A: It is inapplicable if the prior inconsistent
481, 1992 ed.) statement appears in a deposition of the adverse
party, and not a mere witness, that adverse party
Q: May a party impeach his own witness? who testifies may be impeached without laying the
predicate as such prior statements are in the nature
A: GR: A party may not impeach his own witness. of admissions of said adverse party. (Regalado, Vol.
XPN: The witness is an: II, p. 852, 2008 ed.)
1. unwilling or adverse witness so declared
by the court; Q: What is the purpose of laying the predicate?
2. adverse party; or
3. officer of the adverse party who is a A: The purpose of which is to allow the witness to
juridical person (Sec. 12). admit or deny the prior statement and afford him
an opportunity to explain the same. Non-
Note: In these instances, such witnesses may be compliance with the foundational elements for this
impeached
as if he hadby the called
been party presenting him in
by the adverse all respects
party, except mode of ased
ojetio impeachment will be
o ipope a ground forOe
ipeahet. an
by evidence of his bad character. a timely objection, extrinsic evidence of a prior
inconsistent statement without the required
e. HOW THE WITNESS IS IMPEACHED BY EVIDENCE foundation is not admissible. (ibid)
OF INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS (LAYING THE
PREDICATE) Q: Distinguish laying the predicate from laying the
foundation or basis.
Q: What is the procedure for impeaching a witness
by evidence of prior inconsistent statements? A:
LAYING THE LAYING THE FOUNDATION OR
A: PREDICATE BASIS
1. The witness must be confronted with Refers to a situation where
such statements with the circumstances evidence which is otherwise
of the times, places and the persons incompetent will be introduced
present in which they were made; into evidence because it falls
2. The witness must be asked whether he Refers only to under the rules of exclusion.
made such statements, and if so, allowed impeachment of a E.g. under the best evidence
to explain them; and witness through rule, a party must first prove
prior inconsistent that a writing was duly executed
3. If the statement be in writing it must be
statements and that the srcinal has been
shown to the witness before any question
is put to him concerning them (Sec. 13). lost or destroyed. Without first
laying the foundation,
secondary evidence will not be
Note: This procedure is also called the rule on laying
admitted by the court.
the predicate. Where the previous statements of a
witness are offered as evidence of an admission, and
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
f. EVIDENCE OF THE GOOD CHARACTER OF A Q: What are the exceptions to the

res inter alios
WITNESS acta rule(first branch)
?
Q: Is evidence of good character of a witness A:

admissible? 1. Admission by a co-partner or agent (Sec.
29, Rule 130);
A: 2. Admission by a co-conspirator (Sec. 30,
GR: No. Rule 130); and
XPN: When such character has been 3. Admission by privies (Sec. 31, Rule 130)
impeached. (Sec. 14)
nd
Q: What does the rule prohibit? (2Branch of the
Q: When can evidence of bad moral character of Res Inter Alios ActaRule)
the accused be presented?
A: It prohibits the admission of the so-called
A: In a criminal case, the prosecution cannot prove propesit eidee which is evidence that one
the bad moral character of the accused in its did or did not do a certain thing at one time is not
evidence-in-chief. It can only do so in rebuttal (Sec. admissible to prove that he did or did not do the
51 [a][2], Rule 130, Rules of Court). same or similar thing at another time.
Q: When can evidence of good moral character of Evidence of similar acts or occurrences compels the
the accused be presented? defendant to meet allegations that are not
mentioned in the complaint, confuses him in his
A: The accused may prove his good moral character defense, raises a variety of relevant issues, and
when pertinent to the moral trait involved in the diverts the attention of the court from the issues
offense charged (Sec.51 [a][1], Rule 130, Rules of immediately before it. Hence, the evidentiary rule
Court). guards the practical inconvenience of trying
collateral issues and protracting the trial and
Q: When can evidence of character of the prevents surprise or other mischief prejudicial to
offended party may be proved? litigants. (Cruz v. CA, G.R. No. 126713, July 27,
1998).
A: The good or bad moral character of the offended
party may be proved by the accused if it tends to b. ADMISSION BY A PARTY
establish in any reasonable degree the probability
or improbability
[a][3], Rule 130, of the ofoffense
Rules Court).charged (Sec.
Also, not 51
every Q: What is admission?
good or bad moral character of the offended party A: It is an act, declaration or omission of a party as
may be proved under this provision but only those to a relevant fact which may be given in evidence
which would establish the probability or against him (Sec. 26, Rule 130). It is any statement
improbability of the offense charged. of fact made by a party against his interest or
unfavorable to the conclusion for which he
5.ADMISSIONS AND CONFESSIONS contends or is inconsistent with the facts alleged by
him. (Regalado, Vol. II, p. 754, 2008 ed.)
a. RES INTER ALIOS ACTARULE
Note: Sections 26 and 32 of Rule 130 refer to
Q: What is the principle of
res inter alios acta alteri extrajudicial admissions.
nocere non debet?
Q: What are the requisites for an admission to be
A: This piiple liteall eas thigs doe admissible?
between strangers ought not to injure those who
ae ot paties to it. It has to ahes: A:
1. The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced 1. Must involve matters of fact and not of
by an act, declaration, or omission of law;
another (Sec. 28). 2. Must be categorical and definite;
2. Evidence that one did or did not do a 3. Must be knowingly and voluntarily made;
certain thing at one time is not admissible and
to prove that he did or did not do the 4. Must e adese to the adittes
same or similar thing at another time interests (Ibid.).
(Sec. 34).

Q: What are the classifications of admissions? admissions by him. (Estrada v. Desierto, G.R. Nos.
146710-15, Apr. 3, 2001)
A:
1. Express – it is a positive statement or act. Q: Distinguish admission from confession.
2. Implied – it is one which may be inferred
from the declarations or acts of a person. A:
3. Judicial – when made in the course of a ADMISSION CONFESSION
judicial proceeding. A statement of fact which A statement of fact which
4. Extrajudicial – when made out of court or does not involve an involves an
even in a proceeding other than the one acknowledgment of guilt acknowledgment of guilt
under consideration. (Riano, Evidence: A or liability or liability
Restatement for the Bar, p. 117, 2009 ed.) Can be made only by the
May be made by third
5. Adoptive – It is a pats eatio to a party himself and, in
persons and in certain
some instances, are
statement or action by another person cases, are admissible admissible against his co-
he it is easoale to teat the pats against a party
accused
reaction as an admission of something
May be express or
stated or implied by the other person. A Always express
implied
thid pesos stateet eoes the
admission of the party embracing or
Q: What is self-serving declaration?
espousing it. Adoptive admission may
occur when a party:
A: It is one which has been made extrajudicially by
a. Expressly agrees to or concurs in an
the party to favor his interest. It is not admissible in
oral statement made by another;
evidence because they are inherently
b. Hears a statement and later on
untrustworthy, and would open the door to fraud
essentially repeats it;
and fabrication of testimony.
c. Utters an acceptance or builds upon
the assertion of another;
Q: Distinguish declaration against interest from
d. Replies by way of rebuttal to some
admissions.
specific points raised by another but
ignores further points which he or
A:
she has heard the other make; or
DECLARATION AGAINST
e. Reads and signs a written statement ADMISSIONS
INTEREST
made by another. (Republic v. Must have been made Need not be made
Kendrick Development Corp., G.R.
No. 149576, Aug. 8, 2006) against the proprietary or against the proprietary
pecuniary interest of the or pecuniary interest
party of the party
Q: What is meant by the principle of adoptive Made by a party
admission? Must have been made by a himself, and is a
person who is either primary evidence and
A: It states that a party may, by his words or deceased or unable to competent though he
odut, olutail adopt o atif aothes testify be present in court and
statement. Where it appears that a party clearly ready to testify
and unambiguously assented to or adopted the Must be made ante litem
May be made at any
statements of another, evidence of those motam. (Regalado, Vol. II,
time. (Ibid)
statements is admissible against him. (Riano, p. 755, 2008 ed.)
Evidence: A Restatement for the Bar, p. 117, 2009 Admissible only against
Admissible even against
ed.) the party making the
third persons.
admission.
Note: One good example of adoptive admission is the It is an exception to the
It is NOT an exception
alleged admissions made by President Estrada when hearsay rule. (Riano,
to the hearsay rule.
his options had dwindled when, according to the Evidence: A Restatement for
(Ibid.)
Angara Diary, the Armed Forces withdrew its support the Bar, p. 116, 2009 ed.)
from him as President and Commander-in-Chief. Thus,
Angara had to allegedly ask Senate President Pimentel c. ADMISSION BY A THIRD PARTY
to advise Estrada to consider the option of digified
eit or resigatio. Estrada did not object to the Q: What are admissions by a third person?
suggested option but simply said he could never leave
the country. According to the court, his silence on this A: Admissions that is receivable in evidence against
and other related suggestions can be taken as adoptive the party who has expressly referred another to
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
him for information in regard to an uncertain or

disputed matter. But such a reference does not A: No, except in the following cases:
make a person referred to an agent for the purpose 1. If made in the presence of the co-
of making general admissions. The declarations are conspirator who expressly or impliedly
not evidence, unless strictly within the subject agreed therein;
matter relation to which reference is made. 2. Where the facts in said admission are
confirmed in the individual extrajudicial
When the reference was not made to any particular confessions made by the co-conspirator
person but in general, the rule above-stated is not after their apprehension;
applicable. 3. As a circumstance to determine the
credibility of the witness; or
d. ADMISSION BY A CO-PARTNER OR AGENT 4. As circumstantial evidence to show the
probability of the co-ospiatos
Q: What are the requisites of an admission by a co- participation in the offense. (Regalado,
partner or agent? Vol. II, p. 761, 2008 ed.)
A: f. ADMISSION BY PRIVIES
1. The act or declaration of a partner or
agent of the party must be within the Q: What are the requisites of an admission by
scope of his authority; privies?
2. During the existence of the partnership or
agency; and A:
3. After the partnership or agency is shown 1. There must be privity between the party
by evidence other than such act or and the declarant;
declaration (Sec. 29). 2. The declarant as predecessor-in-interest
made the declaration while holding the
Q: Are admissions made after a partnership has title to the property; and
been dissolved fall within the exception? 3. The admission relates to the property
(Sec. 31).
A:
GR: No, because such are made when the g. ADMISSION BY SILENCE
partnership ceased to exist.
Q: When is there an admission by silence?
XPN: Where the admissions are made in

connection with the winding up of the A: There is admission by silence when a party does
partnership affairs, said admissions are still or says nothing when he hears or observes an act or
admissible as the partner is acting as an agent declaration made in his presence when such act or
of his co-partner in said winding up. (Regalado, declaration is such as naturally to call for action or
Vol. II, p. 759, 2008 ed.) comment if not true, and when proper and possible
for him to do so. Such may be given in evidence
e. ADMISSION BY A CO-CONSPIRATOR against him. (Sec. 32, Rule 130)
Q: What are the requisites of an admission by a co- Q: What are the requisites of an admission by
conspirator? silence?
A: A:
1. The declaration or act be made or done 1. He must have heard or observed the act
during the existence of the conspiracy; or declaration of the other person;
2. The declaration or act must relate to the 2. He must have had the opportunity to
conspiracy; and deny it;
3. The conspiracy must be shown by 3. He must have understood the statement;
evidence other than the declaration or act 4. He must have an interest to object, such
(evidence aliunde) (Sec. 30) that he would naturally have done so, if
the statement was not true;
Q: Are extrajudicial admissions made by a 5. The facts were within his knowledge; and
conspirator after the conspiracy has terminated 6. The fact admitted or the inference to be
and even before trial admissible against the co- drawn from his silence is material to the
conspirator?

issue (Sec. 32, Rule 130; People v. Q: May the extra-judicial confession of an accused
Paragsa, G.R. No. L-44060, July 20, 1978). be admitted in evidence against his co-accused?
Q: When is the rule on admission by silence A:

inapplicable? GR: An extrajudicial confession is not admissible
agaist the ofessos o-accused. Said
A: The rule does not apply when a person is under confession is hearsay evidence and violative of
an official investigation. For the silence of a person the res inter alios acta rule.
under a custodial investigation for the commission
of an offense has the right to remain silent and to XPN: It may be admitted in evidence against his
be informed of that right. (Sec. 12, Art. III, 1987 co-accused in the following cases:
Constitution; Riano, Evidence: A Restatement for 1. In case of implied acquiescence of the co-
the Bar, p. 126, 2009 ed.) accused to the extrajudicial confession;
2. In case of interlocking confessions;
h. CONFESSIONS 3. Where the accused admitted the facts
stated by the confessant after being
Q: Define confession. apprised of such confession;
4. If they are charged as co-conspirators of
A: It is a categorical acknowledgment of guilt made the crime which was confessed by one of
by an accused of the offense charged or of any the accused and said confession is used
offense necessarily included therein, without any only as corroborating evidence;
exculpatory statement or explanation (Sec. 33; 5. Where the confession is used as
Regalado, Vol. II, p. 764, 2008 ed.). circumstantial evidence to show the
probability of participation by the co-
Note: If the accused admits having committed the act conspirator;
in question but alleges a justification therefor, the 6. When the confessant testified for his co-
same is merely an admission. (Ibid.) defendant; and
7. Where the co-ospiatos etajudiial
Q: What are the classifications of confession? confession is corroborated by other
evidence of record (Regalado, Vol. II, pp.
A: 772-773, 2008 ed.).
1. Judicial confession – is one made by the
accused before a court in which the case Q: Atty. Franklin V. Tamargo and his eight-year-old
is pending and in the course of legal
proceedings therein and, by itself, can daughter,
Reynaldo Gail,
Geronwere shot and
surfaced andkilled. A certain
executed an
sustain conviction. It is governed by Secs., affidavit stating that a certain Lucio Columna told
1, 3 & 4 of Rule 116. him that he was ordered to kill Atty. Tamargo by
2. Extrajudicial confession – is one made in Lloyd Antiporda. Columna during his detention
any other place or occasion and cannot executed an extrajudicial confession where he
sustain a conviction unless corroborated implicated Antiporda to the crime.
by evidence of corpus delicti. It is
governed by Sec. 33 of Rule 130. However, in a letter, Columna disowned the
contents of his affidavit and narrated how he had
Q: What are the requisites for a confession to be been tortured until he signed the extrajudicial
admissible as evidence? confession. He stated that Antiporda had no
participation in the killings. The prosecutor
A: dismissed the charges. On appeal, DOJ, initially
1. It must involve an express and categorical reversed the dismissal but on MR subsequently
acknowledgement of guilt; ordered the withdrawal of the information. On the
2. Facts admitted must be constitutive of a contrary, the RTC held that there was probable
criminal offense; cause to hold the Antiporda for trial. CA held that
3. It must have been given voluntarily; the RTC judge gravely abused her discretion. Was
4. It must have been intelligently made, the the extrajudicial confession of Columna admissible
accused realizing the importance or legal as evidence?
significance of his act; and
5. There must have been no violation of Sec, A: Coluas etajudiial ofessio affidait as
12 (Miranda rights), Art. III (Bill of Rights) not admissible as evidence against Antiporda in
of the 1987 Constitution (Regalado, Vol. view of the rule on res inter alios acta. The rule on
II, p. 765, 2008 ed.).
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
res inter alios acta provides that the rights of a 6. Scheme;

party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, 7. Habit;
or omission of another. Consequently, an 8. Custom;
extrajudicial confession is binding only on the 9. Usage; and
confessant, is not admissible against his or her co- 10. The like (Sec. 34, Rule 130)
accused and is considered as hearsay against them.
An exception to the res inter alios acta rule is an 6. HEARSAY RULE

admission made by a conspirator under Sec. 30,
Rule 130 of the Rules of Court. This rule prescribes a. MEANING OF HEARSAY
that the act or declaration of the conspirator
relating to the conspiracy and during its existence Q: Define hearsay evidence.
may be given in evidence against co-conspirators
provided that the conspiracy is shown by A: Any evidence, whether oral or documentary, and
independent evidence aside from the extrajudicial its probative value is not based on personal
confession. knowledge of the witness but on the knowledge of
some other person not on the witness stand. It also
Considering the paucity and inadmissibility of the includes all assertions where, though derived from
evidence presented against the Antiporda, it would personal knowledge, the adverse party is not given
be unfair to hold them for trial (Tamargo v. an opportunity to cross-examine. (1999 Bar
Awingan, G.R. No. 177727, Jan. 19, 2010). Question)
Q: What is the doctrine of interlocking Q: What are the elements of hearsay evidence?
confessions?
A:
A: It states that extrajudicial confessions 1. There must be an out-of-court statement;
independently made without collusion which are and
identical with each other in their essential details 2. That the statement made out of court, is
and corroborated by other evidence against the repeated and offered by the witness in
persons implicated, are admissible to show the court to prove the truth of the matters
probability of the la ttes atual patiipatio i the asserted by the statement. (Riano,
commission of the crime. Evidence: A Restatement for the Bar, p.
348, 2009 ed.)
i. SIMILAR ACTS AS EVIDENCE Q: What are the two concepts of hearsay

Q: What do similar acts of evidence prohibit? evidence?
A: The rule prohibits the admission of the so-called A:

popesit eidee hih is eidee that teds 1. Any evidence, whether oral or
to show that what a person has done at one time is documentary, is hearsay if its probative
probative of the contention that he has done a value is not based on the personal
similar act at another time. Evidence of similar acts knowledge of the witness but on the
or occurrences compels the defendant to meet knowledge of some other person not on
allegations that are not mentioned in the the witness stand. (Regalado, Vol. II, p.
complaint, confuses him in his defense, raises a 776, 2008 ed.)
variety of relevant issues, and diverts the attention 2. It also includes all assertions which have
of the court from the issues immediately before it. not been subjected to cross-examination
(Cruz v. Court of Appeals, 293 SCRA 239). by the adverse party at the trial in which
they are being offered against him.
Q: When is evidence of similar acts or previous (Herrera, Vol. V, p. 581, 1999 ed.)
conduct admissible?
b. REASON FOR EXCLUSION OF HEARSAY
A: It is admissible where such evidence may prove: EVIDENCE
1. Specific intent;
2. Knowledge; Q: What is the hearsay rule?
3. Identity;
4. Plan; A: It states that a witness can testify only to those
5. System; facts which he knows of based on his personal

knowledge or those which are derived from his own statement may be shown where the fact that it is
perception. (2007 Bar Question) made is relevant. Evidence as to the making of such
statement is not secondary but primary, for the
Q: What is the rationale of excluding hearsay statement itself may constitute a fact in issue or be
evidence? circumstantially relevant as to the existence of such
fact (Gotesco Investment Corp. v. Chatto, G.R. No.
A: There is no opportunity for cross-examination 87584, June 16, 1992). (2003 Bar Question)
hence it is not subject to the test of truth.
Q: What are the classifications of out-of-court
Q: Brothers Billy & Luis were charged with murder statements?
fo killig Vhog’s fathe. Vhog, hoee, as
charged with parricide for being a co-principal to A:
the crime. The two cases were tried jointly not 1. Hearsay – Its probative force depends, in
until the two brothers withdrew their not guilty whole or in part, on the competency and
plea for murder.Thus, ol Vhog’s ase as tied credibility of some persons other that the
on the merits. The prosecution offered in evidence witness by whom it is sought to produce it
the affidavits of Billy & Luis containing their extra- (Estrada v. Desierto, G.R. Nos. 146710-15
judicial confessions. The two brothers were, & 146738, Apr. 3, 2001). It is inadmissible
however, not presented by the prosecution on the as evidence.
witness stand. Thereafter, the trial court convicted 2. Non-hearsay – This occurs when the
the accused. Is the trial court correct? purpose for introducing the statement is
not to prove the truth of the facts
A: No. The failure to present Billy and Luis gives the asserted therein but only the making of
affidavits the character of hearsay. It is hornbook the statements and are admissible in
doctrine that unless the affiants themselves take evidence when the making of the
the witness stand to affirm the averments in their statement is relevant. These are the so-
affidavits must be excluded from the judicial called independently relevant statements.
proceeding, being inadmissible hearsay. The 3. Exceptions to the hearsay rule – Those
voluntary admission of an accused made which are hearsay but are considered as
extrajudicially is not admissible in evidence against exceptions to the hearsay rule and are
his co-accused when the latter had not been given therefore admissible. (Secs. 37-47, Rule
an opportunity to hear him testify and cross- 130)
examine him (People v. Quidato, Jr., G.R. No.
117401. Oct. 1, 1998) Q: What are independently relevant statements?

Q: Distinguish hearsay evidence and opinion A: These are statements which are relevant
evidence. (2004 Bar Question) independently of whether they are true or not.
They are neither hearsay nor an exception to the
A: hearsay rule as the purpose thereof is not to prove
HEARSAY EVIDENCE OPINION EVIDENCE the truth of the declaration or document (Estrada v.
Expert evidence based on Desierto, G.R. Nos. 146710-15 & 146738, Apr. 3,
Consists of testimony the personal knowledge, 2001).
that is not based on skill, experience or training
personal knowledge of of the person testifying and They are relevant since they are the facts in issue or
the person testifying evidence of an ordinary are circumstantial evidence of the facts in issue.
witness on limited matters
Q: What are the classifications of independently
Q: Ben was charged with robbery and was arrested relevant statements?
by police operatives by virtue of a warrant of
arrest. In a press conference called by the police, A:
Ben admitted that he had robbed the victim. The 1. Those statements which are the very facts
prosecution presented in evidence a newspaper in issue;
clipping of the report of the reporter who was 2. Those statements which are
present during the press conference stating that circumstantial evidence of the fact in
Ben admitted the robbery. Is the newspaper issue. It includes the following:
clipping admissible in evidence against Ben? a. Statements of a person showing his
state of mind, that is, his mental
A: Yes. Regardless of the truth or falsity of a
statement, the hearsay rule does not apply and the
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
condition, knowledge, belief, 5. The declarant is competent as a witness

intention, ill-will and other emotions; had he survived. (Geraldo v. People, G.R.
b. Statements of a person which show No. 173608, Nov. 20, 2008; Riano,
his physical condition, as illness and Evidence: A Restatement for the Bar, p.
the like; 370, 2009 ed.)
c. Statements of a person from which
an inference may be made as to the Q: What factors should be considered in
state of mind of another, i.e., the determining whether the declarant is conscious of
knowledge, belief, motive, good or his impending death?
bad faith, etc. of the latter; A:
d. Statements which may identify the 1. Utterances;
date, place and person in question; 2. Actual character and seriousness of his
and wounds; and
e. Statements showing the lack of 3. B the delaats odut ad the
credibility of a witness. circumstances at the time he made the
declaration, whether he expected to
c. EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE survive his injury.
Q: What are the exceptions to the hearsay rule? Note: A dying declaration may be oral or written. If
oral, the witness who heard it may testify thereto
A: without the necessity of reproducing the word of the
1. Dying declaration; decedent, if he is able to give the substance thereof.
2. Declaration against interest; An unsigned dying declaration may be used as a
3. Act or declaration about pedigree; memorandum by the witness who took it down
(People v. Boller, G.R. Nos. 144222-24, Apr. 3, 2002).
4. Family reputation or tradition regarding
pedigree;
(2) DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST
(SEC. 38)
5. Common reputation;
6. Part of the res gestae;
Q: What are the requisites for the admissibility of
7. Entries in the course of business;
declaration against interest?
8. Entries in official records;
9. Commercial lists and the like;
A:
10. Learned treaties;
11. Testimony or deposition at a former trial. 1. That the declaration is one made by a
dying person;
(1) DYING DECLARATION
(SEC. 37) 2. That the declaration was made by said
dying person under a consciousness of his
Q: Define dying declaration.
imminent death;
3. That the declaration refers to the cause
A: The ante mortem statements made by a person
and circumstances surrounding the death
after the mortal wound has been inflicted under the of the declarant and not of anyone else;
belief that the death is certain, stating the fact 4. That the declaration is offered in a case
hee the delaats death is the sujet
concerning the cause of and the circumstances
surrounding the attack. of the inquiry;
5. The delcarant is competent as a witness
Q: What are the requisites of dying declaration to
had he survived;
be considered as an exception to the hearsay rule?
6. The declarant should have died. (Riano,
p.379)
A:
Q: Distinguish declaration against interest from
1. The declaration is one made by a dying person;
admission against interest.
2. The declaration was made by said dying person
under a consciousness of his impending death;
A:
3. The declaration refers to the cause and
DECLARATION AGAINST ADMISSION AGAINST
circumstances surrounding the death of the
INTEREST INTEREST
declarant and not of anyone else;
4. The declaration is offered in a case wherein Made by a person who is Made by a party to a
neither a party nor in litigation or by one in
the delaats death is the sujet of the
privity with a party to the privity with or identified
inquiry; and suit and are secondary in legal interest with
evidence but constitute an such party.

exception to the hearsay Q: What does pedigee ilude?

rule.
A: It includes:
Admissible only when the Admissible whether or 1. Relationship;
declarant is unavailable as not the declarant is 2. Family genealogy;
a witness. available as a witness. 3. Birth;
4. Marriage;
Q: Harry Pattinson was charged with the crime of 5. Death;
kidnapping of Edward Radcliffe. One of the 6. Dates when and the place where these
testimonies presented by the prosecution was that facts occurred;
of Emma Granger, she testified that Edward 7. Names of the relatives; and
ofided to he that he ad Ha’s ife Bella 8. Facts of family history intimately
were having an affair. Undoubtedly, his wife's connected with pedigree. (Sec. 39, Rule
infidelity was ample reason for Harry to 130)
contemplate revenge. Consequently, the trial
court convicted Harry based on the testimonies of (4) FAMILY REPUTATION OR TRADITION
the witnesses. Was the testimony of Emma REGARDING PEDIGREE
(SEC. 40)
admissible as evidence?
Q: What are the requisites for the admissibility of
A: Yes. Edads eelatio to Ea egadig his family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree?
illiit elatioship ith Has ife is adissile i
evidence, pursuant to Section 38, Rule 130 of the A:
Revised Rules on Evidence. With the deletion of the 1. There is controversy in respect to the
phrase "pecuniary or moral interest" from the pedigree of any member of the family;
present provision, it is safe to assume that 2. The reputation or tradition of the
"declaration against interest" has been expanded to pedigree of the person concerned existed
include all kinds of interest, that is, pecuniary, previous to the controversy; and
proprietary, moral or even penal. Hector having 3. The witness testifying to the reputation or
been missing since his abduction, cannot be called tradition regarding pedigree of the person
upon to testify. His confession to Emma, definitely a concerned must be a member of the
declaration against his own interest, since his affair family of said person either by
with Bella was a crime, is admissible in evidence consanguinity or affinity.
because no sane person will be presumed to tell a
falsehood to his
Theodore Bernal, G.R.own detriment.
No. 113685, (People
June 19, 1997) v. Q: What are the ways to establish family
eputatio o taditio i espet to oe’s
pedigree?
(3) ACT OR DECLARATION ABOUT PEDIGREE
(SEC.
39) A:
1. Through testimony in open court of a
Q: What are the requisites for the admissibility of witness who must be a member of the
acts or declarations about pedigree? family either by consanguinity or affinity;
2. Through entries in:
A: a. Family bible;
1. The declarant is dead or unable to testify; b. Family books or charts;
2. The pedigree should be in issue; c. Engravings on rings; or
3. The declarant must be a relative of the d. Family portraits and the like.
person whose pedigree is in question;
4. The declaration must be made before the Q: Distinguish Sec. 39 from Sec. 40.
controversy occurred; and
5. The relationship between the declarant A:
and the person whose pedigree is in SECTION 39 SECTION 40
question must be shown by evidence Family reputation or
Act or declaration about
other than such act or declaration. tradition regarding
pedigree
(Tecson v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 161434, pedigree
Mar. 3, 2004) Witness need not be a Witness is a member of
member of the family the family
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
The witness is the one to Q: What are the reasons for the admissibility of
whom the fact relates, it common reputation?
Relation of the declarant
is not necessary for him
and the person subject of
to establish by A:
the inquiry must be
independent evidence his 1. Necessity arising from the inherent
established by
relationship to the family difficulty of obtaining any other evidence
independent evidence
(Francisco, p. 292, 1992 than that in the nature of common
ed.)
reputation; and
Testimony is about what
Testimony is about family 2. Trustworthiness of the evidence arising
declarant, who is dead or
reputation or tradition from:
unable to testify, has said
covering matters of
concerning the pedigree
pedigree a. The supposition that the public is
of the family
conversant with the subject to be
(5) COMMON REPUTATION
(SEC. 41) proved because of their general
interest therein; and
b. The fact that the falsity or error of
Q: What is common reputation?
such evidence could be exposed or
corrected by other testimony since
A: It is the definite opinion of the community in
the public are interested in the
which the fact to be proved is known or exists. It
same. (Francisco, pp. 296-297, 1992
means the general or substantially undivided
ed.)
reputation, as distinguished from a partial or
qualified one, although it need not be unanimous.
(6) RES GESTAE(SEC.42)
(Regalado, Vol. II, p. 787, 2008 ed.)
Note: As a general rule, the reputation of a person Q: What isres gestae?

should be that existing in the place of his residence; it
may also be that existing in the place where he is best A: It is a Latin phrase which literally means "things
known. (Ibid.) done." As an exception to the hearsay rule, it refers
to those exclamations and statements by either the
Q: What are the requisites for the admissibility of participants, victims, or spectators to a crime
common reputation? immediately before, during or immediately after
the commission of the crime, when the
A: circumstances are such that the statements were
1. The facts must be of public or general made

inspiredasbyspontaneous reactions
the excitement of the or utterances
occasion, and
interest and more than 30 years old;
2. The common reputation must have been there was no opportunity for the declarant to
ancient, i.e. 30 years old; deliberate and fabricate a false statement (Capila v.
3. The reputation must have been one People, G.R. No. 146161, July 17, 2006).
formed among a class of persons who
were in a position to have some sources Q: What are the requisites for the admissibility of
of information and to contribute res gestae?
intelligently to the formation of the
opinion; and A:
4. The common reputation must have been 1. The principal act or the res gestae is a
existing previous to the controversy. startling occurrence;
2. The statement is spontaneous or was
Q: What can be established by common made before the declarant had time to
reputation? contrive or devise, and the statement is
made during the occurrence or
A: immediately prior or subsequent thereto;
1. Matters of public interest more than 30 and
years old; 3. The statement made must concern the
2. Matters of general interest more than 30 ouee i uestio ad its
immediately attending circumstances
3. years old;respecting marriage or moral
Matters (Capila v. People, G.R. No. 146161, July
character and related facts; 17, 2006).
4. Individual moral character.

Q: Distinguishres gestaefrom dying declaration. iii. The equivocal act must be relevant
to the issue; and
A: iv. The verbal acts must be
RES GESTAE DYING DECLARATION contemporaneous with the equivocal
A sense of impending act.
death takes the place of
It is the event itself
an oath and the law 2. Spontaneous StatementsStatements
- or
which speaks
regards the declarant as exclamations made immediately after
testifying some exciting occasion by a participant or
May be made by the spectator and asserting the circumstances
killer after or during the Can be made by the of that occasion as it is observed by him.
killing or that of a third victim only The res gestae is the startling occurrence.
person
It may be prior to or simultaneously with,
May precede, or Confined to matters
accompany or follow the occurring after the or subsequent with the startling
occurrence.
principal act homicidal act
Justification is the
Requisites:
Justification is the trustworthiness, being
spontaneity of the given by the person who i. There must be a startling occurrence;
statement was aware of his ii. The statement must relate to the
impending death circumstances of the startling
occurrence;
Q: What is the reason for the rule res
on gestae? iii. The statement must be spontaneous.
A: The reason for the rule is human experience. It Q: Anthony raped Melissa. After raping Melissa,
has been shown that under certain external Anthony fled. Melissa then rushed to the police
circumstances of physical or mental shock, the state station and told Police Officer Gilbert what had
of nervous excitement which occurs in a spectator happened. Anhthony was charged with rape.
may produce a spontaneous and sincere response During the trial, Melissa can no longer be located.
to the actual sensations and perceptions produced If the prosecution presents Gilbert to testify on
by the external shock. what Melissa had told him, would such testimony
As the statements or utterances are made under of Gilbert be hearsay? Explain.
the immediate and uncontrolled domination of the
senses, rather than reason and reflection, such A: No. It is part of res gestae. It is also an
statements or utterances may be taken as independently relevantknowledge;

based on his personal statement. that
Buloyis, testified
he was
expressing the real belief of the speaker as to the
facts he just observed. The spontaneity of the testifying to the fact that Reyna told him that she
declaration is such that the declaration itself may as aped  “a ad ot to the tuth of ‘eas
be regarded as the event speaking through the statement (People v. Gaddi, G.R. No. 74065, Feb.
declarant rather than the declarant speaking for 27, 1989). (2005 Bar Question)
himself (Ibid.).
(7) ENTRIES IN THE ORDINARY COURSE OF
Q: What are the two types res
of gestae? BUSINESS/SHOP-BOOK RULE(SEC. 43)
A: Q: What are the requisites for the admissibility of

1. Verbal Acts – Utterances which entries in the course of business?
accompany some act or conduct to which
it is desired to give legal effect. The res A:
gestae is the equivocal act material to the 1. The person who made the entry must be
issue, and giving it legal significance. It dead or unable to testify;
must be contemporaneous with or must 2. The entries were made at or near the
accompany the equivocal act in order to time of the transactions to which they
be admissible. refer;
3. The entrant was in a position to know the
facts stated in the entries;
Requisites: 4. The entries were made in his professional
i. The fact or occurrence characterized
must be equivocal; capacity or in the performance of a duty,
ii. The verbal acts must characterize or whether legal, contractual, moral or
explain the equivocal act; religious; and
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
5. The entries were made in the ordinary or Q: Should entries in the police blotter be given
regular course of business or duty. probative value?
(Regalado, Vol. II, pp. 791-792, 2008 ed.)
A: No, as they are not conclusive evidence of the
Q: How is regularity of the entries proved? truth of the contents but merely of the fact that
they were recorded. (People v. Cabrera, Jr., G.R. No.
A: It may be proved by the form in which they 138266, Apr. 30, 2003)
appear as entries in the books/ledgers. There is no Q: Distinguish entries in the course of business
need to present for testimony the clerk who from entries in official record.
manually made the entries. The person who
supervised such clerk is competent to testify that: A:
1. The account was prepared under his ENTRIES IN THE COURSE ENTRIES IN OFFICIAL
supervision; and OF BUSINESS RECORD
2. That the entries were regularly entered in It is sufficient that the The entrant,must
if a private
the ordinary course of business entrant made the entries individual, have
(Regalado, Vol. II, p. 792, 2008 ed.). pursuant to a duty be it acted pursuant to a
legal, contractual, moral specific legal duty
Q: Is there an instance where business entries may or religious. specially enjoined by law.
be admitted in evidence even when the declarant Entrant must be dead or
No such requirement
is alive? unable to testify.
A: The entries will not be admitted as an exception (9) COMMERCIAL LIST AND THE LIKE
(SEC. 45)
to the hearsay rule, but they may nevertheless be
availed of by said entrant as a memorandum to Q: What are the requisites for the admissibility of
refresh his memory while testifying on the commercial list and the like?
transactions reflected therein. (Ibid.)
A:
(8) ENTRIES IN OFFICIAL RECORDS
(SEC. 44) 1. Statements of matters of interest to
persons engaged in an occupation;
Q: What is an official record? 2. Statements must be contained in a list,
register, periodical, or other published
A: It may be a: compilation;
1. Register; 3. Compilation is published for use by
persons engaged in that occupation; and
2.
3. Cash book;return
An official or or certificate (Regalado, 4. Such is generally relied upon by them.
Vol. II, p. 793, 2008 ed.)
Q: What are the examples of commercial lists and
Q: What are the requisites for the admissibility of the like?
entries in official records?
A:
A: 1. Trade journals reporting current prices
1. Entries were made by a public officer in and other market data;
the performance of his duties or by a 2. Mortality tables compiled for life
person in the performance of a duty insurance;
especially enjoined by law; 3. Abstracts of title compiled by reputable
2. Entrant had personal knowledge of the title examining institutions or individuals;
facts stated by him or such facts were or
acquired by him from reports made by 4. Business directories, animal pedigree
persons under a legal duty to submit the registers, and the like. (Francisco, p. 339,
same; and 1992 ed.)
3. Such entries were duly entered in a
regular manner in the official records. (10) LEARNED TREATIES
(SEC. 46)
(Ibid.)
Q: When are learned treatises admissible?
Q: What is the probative value of these entries?
A:
A: It is only prima facie evidence of the fact stated 1. When the court can take judicial notice of
therein. them; or

2. When an expert witness testifies that the relates and who possesses special knowledge on
author of such is recognized as expert in questions on which he proposes special knowledge
that profession. (Sec. 46) to express an opinion. (Regalado, Vol. II, p. 802,
2008 ed.)
Q: What are the examples of learned treatises?
Q: Is there a definite standard of determining the
A: degree of skill or knowledge that a witness must
1. Historical works; possess in order to testify as an expert?
2. Scientific treatises; or
3. Law (Francisco, pp. 340-341, 1992 ed.) A: None. It is sufficient that the following factors
are present:
(11) TESTIMONY OR DEPOSITION AT A FORMER 1. Training and education;
PROCEEDING(SEC. 47) 2. Particularity, first-hand familiarity with
the facts of the case; and
Q: What are the requisites for the admissibility of 3. Presentation of authorities or standards
testimony or deposition at a former proceeding? upon which his opinion is based. (People
A: v. Abriol, G.R. No. 123137, Oct. 17, 2001)
1. Witness whose testimony is offered in
evidence is dead or unable to testify; Q: What is expert evidence?
2. The testimony or deposition was given in
a former case or proceeding, judicial or A: It is the testimony of a person (expert witness)
administrative, between the same parties possessing knowledge not usually acquired by other
or those representing the same interests; persons in a particular subject matter.
3. Former case involved the same subject as Note: It is admissible when the matter to be
that in the present case, although on established requires expertise and the witness have
different causes of action; been qualified as an expert.
4. Issue testified to by the witness in the
former trial is the same issue involved in Q: What is the test in determining whether there
the present case; and is need to resort to expert evidence?
5. Adverse party had an opportunity to
cross-examine the witness in the former A: The test is whether the opinion called for will aid
case. the court in resolving an issue.
b. OPINION OF ORDINARY WITNESS

Q: What
make are the unable
a witness grounds,
toaside from
testify in adeath, which
subsequent
case? Q: What is an opinion?
A: A: It is an inference or conclusion based or drawn

1. Insanity or mental incapacity or the from the facts established.
foe itess loss of eo though
old age or disease; Q: Is the opinion of a witness admissible in
2. Physical disability by reason of sickness or evidence?
advanced age;
3. The fact that the witness has been kept A:
away by contrivance of the opposite GR: The opinion of a witness is not admissible.
party; or The witness must testify to facts within their
4. The fact that after diligent search the knowledge and may not state their opinion
former witness cannot be found. even on their examination.
(Francisco, p. 342, 1992 ed.)
XPN:
7. OPINION RULE 1. Opinion of an expert witness (Sec.
49);
a. OPINION OF EXPERT WITNESS 2. Opinion of an ordinary witness as to:
a. The identity of a person about
Q: Who is an expert witness? whom he has adequate
knowledge;
A: He is one who belongs to the profession or b. A handwriting with which he
calling to which the subject matter of the inquiry has sufficient familiarity;
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
c. The mental sanity of a person is pertinent to the issue of character

with whom he is sufficiently involved in the case (Sec. 51).
acquainted; and
d. The itess ipessios of the Note: As to witnesses to both criminal and civil actions,
emotion, behavior, condition or the bad moral character of a witness may always be
appearance of a person (Sec. proved by either party but not evidence of his good
50). moral character, unless such character has been
impeached (Sec. 14, Rule 132) .
8. CHARACTER EVIDENCE
a. CRIMINAL CASES Q: What are the requirements provided by the
b. CIVIL CASES rules with respect to the nature or substance of
the character evidence which may be admissible?
Q: When may character evidence be admitted in
evidence? A: 1. With respect to the accused, such
A: haate eidee ust e petiet to
GR: Character evidence is not admissible in the moral trait involved in the offense
evidence. haged.
2. With respect to the offended person, it is
XPN: sufficient that such character evidence
1. Criminal cases: a estalish i a easoale degee
a. The accused may prove his good the probability or improbability of the
moral character which is pertinent to offese haged.
the moral trait involved in the 3. With respect to the witness, such
offense charged; character evidence must refer to his
b. The prosecution may not prove the geeal eputatio fo truth, honesty or
bad moral character of the accused itegit, that is affetig his ediilit.
which is pertinent to the moral trait (Regalado, Vol. II, p. 814, 2008 ed.)
involved in the offense charged,
unless in rebuttal when the latter 9. RULE ON EXAMINATION OF A CHILD WITNESS
opens the issue by introducing
evidence of his good moral a. APPLICABILITY OF THE RULE
character; or
Q: In what cases is the Rule on Examination of a
c. As
badtomoral
the offended
characterparty,
mayhis
be good or
proved Child Witness applicable?
as long as it tends to establish in any
reasonable degree the probability or A: It shall apply in all criminal and non-criminal
improbability of the offense charged. proceedings involving child witnesses. This Rule
shall govern the examination of child witnesses who
XPN to the XPN: are victims of crime, accused of a crime, and
i. In rebuttal, proof of the bad witnesses of a crime (Sec. 1).
character of the victim is not
admissible if the crime was Q: When are the provisions of the Rules of Court
committed through treachery and applicable in the examination of a child witness?
premeditation; and
ii. In rape cases, the evidence of A: The provisions of the Rules of Court on
oplaiats past seual deposition, conditional examination of witnesses,
conduct, or reputation or opinion and evidence shall be applied in a suppletory
thereof shall not be admitted character (Sec. 32).
unless and only to the extent that
the court finds that such evidence . MEANING OF CHILD WITNE““
is material and relevant to the
case (Rape shield, Sec. 6, R.A. Q: Who is a child witness?
8505).
A: A child witness is any person who at the time of
2. Civil cases – The moral character of either giving testimony is below the age of 18 years. In
party thereto cannot be proved unless it 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, or discrimination because of a A: It is determined by the totality of the

physical or mental disability or condition [Sec. 4(a)]. circumstances and conditions as are most congenial
to the survival, protection and feelings of security
Q: What is the difference between a child witness of the child and most encouraging to his physical,
and an ordinary witness? psychological and emotional development. It also
A: means the least detrimental available alternative
CHILD WITNESS ORDINARY WITNESS for safeguarding the growth and development of
Only the judge is allowed the child [Sec. 4(g)].
Opposing counsels are
to ask questions to a
allowed to ask questions
child c. COMPETENCY OF A CHILD WITNESS
during preliminary
witness during
examination
preliminary examination Q: What is the rule on the competency of a child
Testimony in a narrative Testimony in a narrative witness?
form is allowed form is not allowed
Leading questions are Leading questions are
A: Every child is presumed qualified to be a witness.
allowed generally not allowed
However, the court shall conduct a competency
The child witness is An ordinary witness is not
examination of a child, motu proprio or on motion
assisted by a support assisted by a support
person person
of a party, when it finds that substantial doubt
exists regarding the ability of the child to perceive,
remember, communicate, distinguish truth from
Q: Who is a facilitator?
falsehood, or appreciate the duty to tell the truth in
court.
A: He is a person appointed by the court to pose
questions to a child. [Sec. 4(c)] The facilitator may
Q: What must a party seeking competency
be a child psychologist, psychiatrist, social worker,
examination present?
guidance counselor, teacher, religious leader,
parent or relative.
A: He must present proof of necessity of
competency examination. The age of the child by
Q: Who is a support person?
itself is not a sufficient basis for a competency
examination. [Sec. 6(a)]
A: He is a person chosen by the child to accompany
him to testify at or attend a judicial proceeding or
Q: Where does the burden of proof lie?
deposition to provide emotional support for him.
[Sec. 4(f)]
A: It lies
of the on[Sec.
child the 6(b)]
party. challenging the competency
Q: What is an in-depth investigative interview or
disclosure interview?
Q: Who are the persons allowed at a competency
examination?
A: It is an inquiry or proceeding conducted by duly
trained members of a multidisciplinary team or
A: Only the following are allowed at a competency
representatives of law enforcement or child
examination:
protective services for the purpose of determining
1. The judge and necessary court personnel;
whether child abuse has been committed. [Sec. 4(i)]
2. The counsel for the parties;
3. The guardian ad litem, if any;
Q: When may the court appoint a guardian
ad
4. One or more support persons for the
litem for a child?
child; and
5. The defendant, unless the court
A: The court may appoint a guardian ad litem for a
determines that competence can be fully
child who is a victim of, accused of, or a witness to a
evaluated in his absence. [Sec. 6(c)]
crime to promote the best interests of the child. In
making the appointment, the court shall consider
Q: Who shall conduct the competency
the background of the guardian ad litem and his
examination?
familiarity with the judicial process, social service
programs, and child development, giving
A: It shall be conducted only by the judge but the
preference to the parents of the child, if qualified counsel for the parties can submit questions to the
[Sec. 5(a)].
judge that he may, in his discretion, ask the child.
[Sec. 6(d)]
Q: What determines the best interests of the
child?
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
Q: What are the appropriate questions to be asked necessary to show that rape has indeed been
to the child during competency examination? committed. The silence of a rape victim or failure to
immediately disclose her plight to the authorities is no
A: The questions to be asked are: proof at all that the charges are baseless or fabricated.
1. Appropriate to the age and More often than not, a victim would bear the ignominy
developmental level of the child; and pain in private rather than reveal her shame to the
2. Not related to the issues at trial; and whole world or risk the danger of physical harm by the
rapist (People v. Pioquinto, G.R. No. 168326, Apr. 11,
3. Shall focus on the ability of the child to
2007).
remember, communicate, distinguish
between truth and falsehood, and
Q: Boy was charged with rape of his 10 year old
appreciate the duty to testify truthfully.
stepdaughter, Angie, to which he pleaded not
[Sec. 6(e)]
guilty. For the prosecution, it presented as
witnesses the victim and a Medico Legal
Q: What is meant by developmental level? Certificate issued by Dr. Luna, the results of which
showed that the victim suffered hymenal
A: It refers to the specific growth phase in which
laceration. For the defense, he vehemently denied
most individuals are expected to behave and
the charges and presented an alibi. RTC, affirmed
function in relation to the advancement of their
with modification by the CA convicted the
physical, socio-emotional, cognitive, and moral
accused. Should the testimony of the child be
abilities. [Sec. 4(h)]
given full weight and credit?
Q: What is the duty of the court regarding the

A: Testimonies of child victims are given full weight
competency of the child?
and credit, for when a woman or a girl-child says
that she has been raped; she says in effect all that is
A: It has the duty of continuously assessing the
necessary to show that rape was indeed
competence of the child throughout his testimony.
committed. Youth and immaturity are generally
[Sec. 6(f)]
badges of truth and sincerity.
Q: In case of a child witness, what should the court
Agies testio that she as aped  the
consider in determining his competency?
accused is highly trustworthy not only because of
the fact that she was merely a young lass below
A: The court must consider his capacity:
twelve years of age at the time she testified before
1. At the time the fact to be testified to
the trial court who would not concoct a sordid tale
occurred such thatthereof;
correct impressions he could receive against his stepfather whom she endearingly calls
papa ut oe so eause of her candid, positive,
2. To comprehend the obligation of an oath;
direct, and consistent narration of how her
and
stepfather sexually abused her.
3. To relate those facts truly at the time he
is offered as a witness. The court should
She vividly recounted that she was awakened one
take into account his capacity for
night when she felt someone touching her body.
observation, recollection and
Angie identified the aggressor as the accused who
communication. (Regalado, Vol. II, pp.
immediately covered her mouth with his hand
739-740, 2008 ed.)
(People v. Sobusa, G.R. No. 181083, Jan. 21, 2010).
d. EXAMINATION OF A CHILD WITNESS

Q: When may the public be excluded from the
courtroom in which a child testifies?
Q: Does the testimony of child witness need
corroboration?
A: When a child testifies, the court may order the
exclusion from the courtroom of all persons,
A: Corroboration shall not be required of a
including members of the press, who do not have a
testimony of a child. His testimony, if credible by
direct interest in the case. Such an order may be
itself, shall be sufficient to support a finding of fact,
made to protect the right to privacy of the child or
conclusion, or judgment subject to the standard of
if the court determines on the record that requiring
proof required in criminal and non-criminal cases
(Sec. 22). the child to testify in open court would cause
psychological harm to him, hinder the
ascertainment of truth, or result in his inability to
Note: The straightforward testimony of a child witness
can be given full weight and credit. When a child says
effectively communicate due to embarrassment,
that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is fear, or timidity.

The court may, motu proprio, exclude the public Q: Who are the persons allowed to preside and be
from the courtroom if the evidence to be produced present in the videotaped deposition?
during trial is of such character as to be offensive to
decency or public morals. The court may also, on A: The judge shall preside at the videotaped
motion of the accused, exclude the public from deposition of a child. Objections to deposition
trial, except court personnel and the counsel of the testimony or evidence, or parts thereof, and the
parties (Sec. 23). grounds for the objection shall be stated and shall
be ruled upon at the time of the taking of the
e. LIVE-LINK TV TESTIMONY OF A CHILD WITNESS deposition. The other persons who may be
permitted to be present at the proceeding are:
Q: When may the court order that the testimony (1) The prosecutor;
of the child be taken by live-link television? (2) The defense counsel;
Explain. (3) The guardian ad litem;
(4) The accused, subject to sub-section (e);
A: The court may order that the testimony of the (5) Other persons whose presence is
child be taken by live-link television if there is a determined by the court to be necessary to the
substantial likelihood that the child would suffer welfare and well-being of the child;
trauma from testifying in the presence of the (6) One or both of his support persons, the
accused, his counsel or the prosecutor as the case facilitator and interpreter, if any;
may be. The trauma must be of a kind which would (7) The court stenographer; and
impair the completeness or truthfulness of the (8) Persons necessary to operate the videotape
testimony of the child (Sec. 25). (2005 Bar equipment.
Question)
g. HEARSAY EXCEPTION IN CHILD ABUSE CASES
f. VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF A CHILD WITNESS
Q: Does the hearsay rule apply in child abuse
Q: When may the court order that the testimony cases?
of the child be taken by videotaped deposition?
Explain. A: A statement made by a child describing any act
or attempted act of child abuse, not otherwise
A: If the court finds that the child will not be able to admissible under the hearsay rule, may be admitted
testify in open court at trial, it shall issue an order in evidence in any criminal or non-criminal
that the deposition of the child be taken and proceeding subject to the following rules:
preserved by videotape. (Sec.27[b]) 1. Before such hearsay statement maybe

If the order of the court is based on evidence that admitted, its proponent shall make
the child is unable to testify in the physical known to the adverse party the intention
presence of the accused, the court may direct the to offer such statement and its particulars
latter to be excluded from the room in which the to provide him a fair opportunity to
deposition is conducted. If the accused is excluded object.
from the deposition, it is not necessary that the
child be able to view an image of the accused. a. If the child is available, the court
(Sec.27[e]) shall, upon motion of the adverse
party, require the child to be present
Note: The rights of the accused during trial, especially at the presentation of the hearsay
the right to counsel and to confront and cross-examine statement for cross-examination by
the child, shall not be violated during the deposition. the adverse party.
(Sec.27[d]) b. When the child is unavailable, the
fact of such circumstance must be
Note: After the srcinal videotaping but before or proved by the proponent.
during trial, any party may file any motion for
additional videotaping on the ground of newly
2. In ruling on the admissibility of such
discovered evidence. The court may order an
hearsay statement, the court shall
additional videotaped deposition to receive the newly
consider the time, content and
discovered evidence. (Sec.27[j]) circumstances thereof, based on various
factors provided by the law, which
provide sufficient indicia of reliability (Sec.
28).
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
h. SEXUAL ABUSE SHIELD RULE thereof unless he signs a written

affirmation that he has received and
Q: What is sexual abuse shield rule? read a copy of the protective order;
that he submits to the jurisdiction of
A: the court with respect to the
GR: It states that the following evidence is not protective order; and that in case of
admissible in any criminal proceeding involving violation thereof, he will be subject
alleged child sexual abuse: to the contempt power of the court;
1. Evidence offered to prove that the alleged d. Each of the tape cassettes and
victim engaged in other sexual behavior; transcripts thereof made available to
and the parties, their counsel, and
2. Evidence offered to prove the sexual respective agents shall bear the
predisposition of the alleged victim [Sec. following cautionary notice:
30(a)].
"This object or document and the
XPN: Evidence of specific instances of sexual contents thereof are subject to a
behavior by the alleged victim to prove that a protective order issued by the court in
person other than the accused was the source (case title), (case number). They shall
of semen, injury, or other physical evidence not be examined, inspected, read,
shall be admissible [Sec. 30(b)]. viewed, or copied by any person, or
disclosed to any person, except as
provided in the protective order. No
i. PROTECTIVE ORDERS
additional copies of the tape or any of
its portion shall be made, given, sold,
Q: What are the other measures provided under
or shown to any person without prior
the rule for the protection of the privacy and court order. Any person violating such
safety of a child witness? protective order is subject to the
contempt power of the court and other
A: penalties prescribed by law."
1. Confidentiality of records
e. No tape shall be given, loaned, sold,
GR: The records may be released only to or shown to any person except as
the ff: ordered by the court.
a. Members of the court staff for f. Within thirty (30) days from receipt,
b. administrative
The prosecutinguse;
attorney; all copies of the tape and any
transcripts thereof shall be returned
c. Defense counsel; to the clerk of court for safekeeping
d. The guardian ad litem; unless the period is extended by the
e. Agents of investigating law court on motion of a party.
enforcement agencies; and g. This protective order shall remain in
f. Other persons as determined by the full force and effect until further
court order of the court. [Sec. 31(b)].
XPN: Upon written request and order of
the court [Sec. 31(a)]. 3. Additional protective orders – The court
may, motu proprio or on motion of any
2. Protective order – Any videotape or party, the child, his parents, legal
audiotape of a child that is part of the guardian, or the guardian ad litem, issue
court record shall be under a protective additional orders to protect the privacy of
order that provides as follows: the child [Sec. 31(c)].
a. Tapes may be viewed only by parties,
their counsel, their expert witness, 4. Publication of identity contemptuous:
and the guardian ad litem; Whoever publishes or causes to be
b. No tape, or any portion thereof, shall published in any format the name,
be divulged by any person address, telephone number, school, or
mentioned in sub-section (a) to any
other person, except as necessary for other isidentifying
who information
or is alleged to be a ofvictim
a child
or
the trial; accused of a crime or a witness thereof,
c. No person shall be granted access to or an immediate family of the child shall
the tape, its transcription or any part

be liable to the contempt power of the apparently waiting for Maximo Gwapito. They
court. (Sec. 31[d]) dragged him to a nearby warehouse. Thereafter, a
gunshot was heard from the warehouse. Maximo
5. Physical safety of child; exclusion of Gwapito was seen running out of the warehouse
evidence followed by the four malefactors.
GR: A child has a right at any court
proceeding not to testify regarding He fell on the ground near the street corner, Angas
personal identifying information, shot him four or five times. The tragic occurence
including his name, address, telephone was witnessed by the victim's son and wife. It was
number, school, and other information only after 8 years when two of the four culprits
that could endanger his physical safety or were convicted by the trial court. On appeal, they
his family. impugned the testimony of the child that he was
XPN: The court may, however, require the only 7 years old when he witnessed the shooting,
child to testify regarding personal and that he testified eight years later or long after
identifying information in the interest of that extraordinary event. Is the contention
justice [Sec. 31(e)]. tenable?
6. Destruction of videotapes and audiotapes A: No. The court in several cases had given
Videotapes and audiotapes produced credence to the testimony of children who had
under the provisions of this Rule or witnessed the death of their parents. In the case of
otherwise made part of the court record Maximo, Jr., the horrible manner in which his father
shall be destroyed after 5 years have was killed must have been indelibly engraved in his
elapsed from the date of entry of uncluttered memory so much so that the passage
judgment [Sec. 31(f)]. of time could not efface it. When he testified, he
was already fifteen years old and a third year high
7. Records of youthful offender: confidential school student. He was certainly a competent
a. Where he has been charged before witness. (People v. Sabater, G.R. No. L-38169, Feb.
any prosecutor or before any 23, 1978)
municipal judge and the charges
have been ordered dropped, all the F. OFFER AND OBJECTION
records of the case shall be
considered as privileged and may not Q: What evidence shall be considered by the
be disclosed directly or indirectly to court?
b. anyone
Where heforhas
anybeen
purpose whatsoever.
charged and the A:
court acquits him, or dismisses the GR: The court shall consider only the evidence
case or commits him to an institution which has been formally offered. The purpose
and subsequently releases him, all for which the evidence is offered must be
the records of his case shall also be specified (Sec. 34).
considered as privileged and may not
be disclosed except: XPN:
i. To determine if a defendant 1. Marked exhibits not formally offered may
may have his sentence be admitted provided it complies with the
suspended under Art. 192 of following requisites:
P.D. 603 or if he may be granted a. must be duly identified by testimony
probation under the provisions duly recorded; and
of P.D. 968; or b. must have been incorporated in the
ii. To enforce his civil liability, if records of the case (Ramos v. Dizon,
said liability has been imposed G.R. No. 137247, Aug. 6, 2006);
in the criminal action [Sec. 2. Under the Rule on Summary Procedure,
31(g)]. where no full blown trial is held in the
interest of speedy administration of
Q: Maximo Gwapito, a 25-year old jeepney driver, justice;
and his 7-year old son, Maximo Gwapito, Jr., 3. In summary judgments under Rule 35
stepped out of their house in order to buy food. where the judge based his decisions on
Upon reaching the street, father and son the pleadings, depositions, admissions,
encountered Richard Sputnik, Ron Sputnik, Jeric affidavits and documents filed with the
Angas and Mark Bayawak. The four were court;
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
4. Documents whose contents are taken A:

judicial notice of by the court;
5. Documents whose contents are judicially
admitted; or
6. Object evidence which could not be
formally offered because they have
disappeared or have become lost after
they have been marked, identified and
testified on and described in the record
and became the subject of cross-
examination of the witness who testified
on them during the trial.
1. OFFER OF EVIDENCE
Q: What are the rationales in stating the purpose

for which the evidence is being offered?
A:
1. For the court to determine whether that
piece of evidence should be admitted or
not;
2. Evidence submitted for one purpose may
not be considered for any other purpose;
and
3. For the adverse party to interpose the
proper objection.
Q: Noelle filed a complaint for recovery of

possession and damages against Kristina. In the
course of the trial, Noelle marked his evidence but
his counsel failed to file a formal offer of evidence.
Kristina then presented in evidence tax
declarations in the name of his father to establish
that
courthis father
ruled is a co-owner
in favor of saying
of Kristina, the property. The
that Noelle
failed to prove sole ownership of the property in
the fae of Kistia’s eidee. Was the out
correct? Explain briefly.
2. WHEN TO MAKE AN OFFER

A: Yes. The court shall consider no evidence which
has not been formally offered. The trial court
Q: How and when should a party make the offer of
rendered judgment considering only the evidence
evidence?
offered by Kristina. The offer is necessary because it
is the duty of the judge to rest his findings of fact
A:
and his judgment only and strictly upon the
Documentary and
evidence offered by the parties at the trial (People Testimonial Evidence
Object Evidence
v. Pecardal, G.R. No. 71381, Nov. 24, 1986). (2007
Must be made after the
Bar Question)
Offer must be made at the pesetatio of pats
time the witness is called testimonial evidence,
Q: What are the stages in the presentation of to testify. and before resting his
documentary evidence? case.
Every time a question is The evidence is only
propounded to a witness, offered once, after all
there is an implied
the evidence soughtoffer of
to be the
andtestimonial
prior to theevidence
resting
elicited by the question. of the case for a party.
Note: The offer shall be done orally unless allowed by

the court to be in writing.
3. OBJECTION 2. Incompetent – The evidence is excluded

by law or rules (Sec. 3, Rule 138) (e.g.
Q: What are the purposes of objections? evidence obtained in violation of the
Constitutional prohibition against
A: unreasonable searches and seizures).
1. To keep out inadmissible evidence that
would cause harm to a liets ause; Alternative Answers:
2. To protect the record, i.e. to present the 1. Specific objections – e.g. parole evidence
issue of inadmissibility of the offered and best evidence rule
evidence in a way that if the trial court General objections – e.g. continuing
rules erroneously, the error can be relied objections (Sec. 37).
upon as a ground for a future appeal; 2. a. objection to a question propounded in
3. To protect a witness from being the course of the oral examination of the
embarrassed by the adverse counsel; witness; and
4. To epose the adesas ufai tatis b. objection to an offer of evidence in
like his consistently asking obviously writing. (1997 Bar Question)
leading questions; and
5. To give the trial court an opportunity to 4. REPETITION OF AN OBJECTION
correct its own errors and at the same
time warn the court that a ruling adverse Q: What is the rule on continuing objections?
to the objector may supply a reason to
ioke a highe outs appellate A:
jurisdiction. (Riano, Evidence: A GR: When it becomes reasonably apparent in
Restatement for the Bar, p. 462, 2009 ed.) the course of the examination that the
questions asked are of the same class as those
Q: When should an objection be made? to which objection has been made (whether
sustained or overruled), it shall not be necessary
A: Objection to evidence offered orally must be to repeat the objection, it being sufficient for
made immediately after the offer is made. the adverse party to record his continuing
Objection to a question propounded in the course objection to such class of questions (Sec. 37).
of the oral examination of a witness shall be made
as soon as the grounds therefore shall become XPNs:
reasonably apparent. An offer of evidence in 1. Where the question has not been
writing shall
notice of thebeoffer
objected
unlesstoa within 3 days
different after
period is answered, it is necessary
objection when to repeat
the evidence the
is again
allowed by the court. In any case, the grounds for offered or the question is again asked;
objection must be specified (Sec. 36). 2. Incompetency is shown later;
3. Where objection refers to preliminary
Q: What is the difference between a "broadside" question, objection must be repeated
objection and a specific objection to the admission when the same question is again asked
of documentary evidence? during the introduction of actual
evidence;
A: A broadside objection is a general objection such 4. Objection to evidence was sustained but
as incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial and does reoffered at a later stage of the trial;
not specify any ground; while a specific objection is 5. Evidence is admitted on condition that its
limited to a particular ground. (1994 Bar Question) competency or relevance be shown by
further evidence and the condition is not
Q: What are the two kinds of objections? Give an fulfilled, the objection formerly
example of each. interposed must be repeated or a motion
to strike out the evidence must be made;
A: and
1. Irrelevant – The evidence being presented 6. Where the court reserves the ruling on
is not relevant to the issue ( e.g. when the objection, the objecting party must
prosecution offers as evidence the alleged request a ruling or repeat the objection.
offer of an insurance company to pay for
the damages suffered by the victim in a
homicide case); and
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
5. RULING the offering party. (Riano, Evidence: A Restatement

for the Bar, p. 471, 2009 ed.)
Q: When should the court make its ruling on the
objection? Q: May a direct testimony given and allowed
without a prior formal offer be expunged from the
A: It must be given immediately after the objection record?
is made, unless the court desires to take a
reasonable time to inform itself on the question A: No. When such testimony is allowed without any
presented; but the ruling shall always be made objection from the adverse party, the latter is
during the trial and at such time as will give the estopped from questioning the non-compliance
party against whom it is made an opportunity to with the requirement.
meet the situation presented by the ruling (Sec. 38).
Q: What is the remedy if a court improperly
6. STRIKING OUT OF AN ANSWER excludes an otherwise admissible evidence?
Q: What are the modes of excluding inadmissible A: The pats eed is to tede the eluded
evidence? evidence by:
1. Testimonial evidence – State for the
A: record the name and other personal
1. Objection – when the evidence is offered. circumstances of the witness and the
2. Motion to strike out or expunge: nature and substance of the proposed
a. When the witness answers prematurely testimony.
before there is reasonable opportunity 2. Object/documentary evidence – Attach to
for the adverse party to object, and or make it a part of the record (Sec. 40).
such objection is found to be
meritorious; 7. TENDER OF EXCLUDED EVIDENCE
b. When the answers are incompetent,
irrelevant, or improper (Sec. 39); Q: What is tender of excluded evidence or offer of
c. When the witness becomes unavailable proof?
for cross-examination through no fault
of the cross-examining party; A: When an attorney is not allowed by the court to
d. When the answer is unresponsive; present testimony which he thinks is competent,
e. When the testimony was allowed material and necessary to prove his case, he must
conditionally and the

admissibility was not condition for its
fulfilled (Riano, make an offer
preserving the of proof.toThis
record theisend
the that
method properly
the question
Evidence: A Restatement for the Bar, p. may be saved for purposes of review. (Caraig,
467, 2009 ed.); Revised Rules of Evidence 2004 ed., p. 337)
f. When a witness has volunteered
statements in such a way that the party Q: How is tender of excluded evidence made?
has not been able to object thereto;
g. When a witness testifies without a A:
question being addressed to him; or 1. As to documentary or object evidence: It
h. When a witness testifies beyond the may have the same attached to or made
ruling of the court prescribing the limits part of the record.
within which he may answer. 2. As to oral evidence: It may state for the
record the name and other personal
Q: May objections be waived? circumstances of the witness and the
substance of the proposed testimony.
A: Yes, because the right to object is merely a
privilege which the party may waive. (People v. Q: What are the purposes of tender of excluded
Martin, G.R. No. 172069, Jan. 30, 2008) evidence?
Q: What is the extent of the waiver for failure to A:

object? 1. To allow the court to know the nature of
the testimony or the documentary
A: It only extends to the admissibility of the evidence and convince the trial judge to
evidence. It does not involve an admission that the permit the evidence or testimony; and
evidence possesses the weight attributed to it by

2. To create and preserve a record for Q: Distinguish English Exchequer rule from
appeal. (Riano, Evidence: A Restatement harmless error rule.
for the Bar, p. 477, 2009 ed.)
A:
Q: Distinguish offer of proof from offer of ENGLISH EXCHEQUER
HARMLESS ERROR RULE
evidence. RULE
It provides that a trial
The appellate court will
A: court's error as to the
disregard an error in the
OFFER OF admission of evidence
admission of evidence
PROOF/TENDER OF OFFER OF EVIDENCE was presumed to have
unless in its opinion, some
EXCLUDED EVIDENCE caused prejudice and
substantial wrong or
Refers to testimonial, therefore, almost
miscarriage of justice has
documentary or object automatically required
Only resorted to if been occasioned.
new trial.
admission is refused by evidence
or offeredthatinare presented
court by a
the court for purposes Note: We follow the harmless error rule, for in dealing
party so that the court can
of with evidence improperly admitted in the trial, courts
consider his evidence when
review on appeal examine its damaging quality and its impact to the
it comes to the preparation
of the decision substantive rights of the litigant. If the impact is slight
and insignificant, appellate courts disregard the error
Q: How is an offer of evidence made? as it will not overcome the weight of the properly
admitted evidence against the prejudiced part (People
v. Garcia, G.R. No. 105805, Aug. 16, 1994).
A:
1. Before the court has ruled on the
objection, in which case its function is to G. SUPREME COURT RULINGS AS OF DECEMBER
2010
persuade the court to overrule the
objection or deny the privilege invoked;
EMMA K. LEEv. COURT OF APPEALS and RITA K. LEE,
et
2. After the court has sustained the
al. G.R. No. 177861, July 13, 2010 (ABAD, J.)
objection, in which case its function is to
preserve for the appeal the evidence Spouses Lee Tek Sheng (Lee) and Keh Shiok Cheng (Keh)
excluded by the privilege invoked; entered the Philippines as immigrants and they had
3. Where the offer of proof includes the 11children (respondents herein). Subsequently, a woman
introduction of documents, or any of the named Tiu Chuan (Tiu) served as the housemaid and upon
physical evidence, the same should be Kehs death, the espodet hilde foud out that the
marked for identification so that they may Tiu hilde lais that the ae also Lee ad Kehs
children. Respondent children then filed before the RTC a
become part of the record. (Herrera, Vol.
special proceeding for the deletion from the certificate of
VI, p. 344) lie ith of Ea Lee, oe of Lees othe hilde, the
name Keh and replace the same with the name Tiu to
Q: When is offer or proof not required? idiate he tue othes ae. Respondent children
then filed an ex parte request for the issuance of a
A: subpoena ad testificandum to opel Tiu, Ea Lees
1. When the question to which an objection presumed mother, to testify in the case. The RTC granted
has been sustained clearly reveals on its the motion but Tiu moved to quash the subpoena,
claiming that it was oppressive and violated Section 25,
face the substance, purpose and
Rule 130 of the Rules of Court, the rule on parental
relevancy of the excluded evidence; privilege, she eig Ea Lees stepothe. The ‘TC
2. When the substance, purpose and quashed the subpoena it issued for being unreasonable
relevancy of the excluded evidence were and oppressive considering that Tiu was already very old
made known to the court either in the and that the obvious object of the subpoena was to
court proceedings and such parts appears adge he ito adittig that she as Ea Lees
on record; mother.
3. Where evidence is inadmissible when
ISSUE: Can Tiu, as the stepmother, be compelled to testify
offered and excluded, but thereafter
in said proceeding? (Yes)
becomes, it must, be re-offered, unless
the court indicates that a second offer HELD: As the CA correctly ruled, the grounds cited—
would be useless. (Herrera, Vol. VI, p. unreasonable and oppressive—are proper for subpoena
344-345) ad duces tecum or for the production of documents and
things in the possession of the witness, a command that
has a tendency to infringe on the right against invasion of
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
privacy. Section 4, Rule 21 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, HELD:

thus provides: The parol evidence rule, embodied in Section 9, Rule 130
SECTION 4. Quashing a subpoena. — The court may of the Rules of Court holds that when the terms of an
quash a subpoena duces tecum upon motion promptly agreement have been reduced into writing, it is
made and, in any event, at or before the time specified considered as containing all the terms agreed upon and
therein if it is unreasonable and oppressive, or the there can be, between the parties and their successors in
relevancy of the books, documents or things does not interest, no evidence of such terms other than the
appear, or if the person in whose behalf the subpoena contents of the written agreement. It, however, admits of
is issued fails to advance the reasonable cost of the exceptions such as when the parties subsequently modify
production thereof. the terms of their srcinal agreement Nevertheless,
respondent contends that when Bennett signed the
Taking in mind the ultimate purpose of respondent August 12, 1997 progress report, petitioner approved the
hildes atio, oiousl, the ould at Tiu to testif additional cost estimates, in effect modifying the srcinal
o adit that she is the othe of Lees othe hilde, agreement in the subcontract. Respondent therefore
including petitioner Emma Lee. Keh had died and so could claims an exception to the parole evidence rule. In
ot gie testio that Lees othe hilde ee ot contracts for a stipulated price like fixed lump-sum
hers. The respondent children have, therefore, a contracts, the recovery of additional costs is governed by
legitiate easo fo seekig Tius testio ad, Article 1724 of the Civil Code. Settled is the rule that a
normally, the RTC cannot deprive them of their right to claim for the cost of additional work arising from changes
compel the attendance of such a material witness. in the scope of work can only b e allowed upon the:
SECTION 25. Parental and filial privilege.- No person (1) Written authority from the developer or project
may be compelled to testify against his parents, other owner ordering or allowing the written changes in work
direct ascendants, children or other direct descendants. and
(2) Written agreement of parties with regard to the
The above is an adaptation from a similar provision in increase in price or cost due to the change in work or
Article 315 of the Civil Code that applies only in criminal design modification.
cases. But those who revised the Rules of Civil Procedure
chose to extend the prohibition to all kinds of actions, Furthermore, compliance with the two requisites of
whether civil, criminal, or administrative, filed against Article 1724, a specific provision governing additional
parents and other direct ascendants or descendants. But works, is a condition precedent for the recovery. The
here Tiu, who invokes the filial privilege, claims that she is absence of one or the other condition bars the recovery of
the stepmother of petitioner Emma Lee. The privilege additional costs. Neither the authority for the changes
cannot apply to them because the rule applies only to made nor the additional price to be paid therefor may be
"direct" ascendants and descendants, a family tie proved by any other evidence.
connected by a common ancestry. A stepdaughter has no
common ancestry by her stepmother. Article 965 thus OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN (VISAYAS) v. RODOLFO
provides: ZALDARRIAGAG.R. No. 175349, June 22, 2010 (PERALTA,
Art. 965. The direct line is either descending or J.)
ascending. The former unites the head of the family
with those who descend from him. The latter binds a Respondent Rodolfo Zaldarriaga was the Municipal
person with those from whom he descends. Treasurer of the Municipality of Lemery, Iloilo. Upon audit
of )aldaiagas ash ad aouts, it as disoeed that
Consequently, Tiu can be compelled to testify against he had a deficiency which he failed to restitute despite
petitioner Emma Lee. notice. Instead, Zaldarriaga sent letters to State Auditor
Garachico requesting for a bill of particulars on his alleged
LEIGHTON CONTRACTORS PHILIPPINES, INC.v. CNP accountability. The COA, however, failed to clarify the
INDUSTRIES INC. G.R. No. 160972, March 9, 2010 basis of the shortage and filed a complaint against him.
(CORONA, J.) When the Office of the Provincial Treasurer conducted its
own investigation as to the shortage, it was found out that
Respondent CNP Industries, Inc. is the subcontractor of there really is no shortage. The COA then conducted a
petitioner Leighton Contractors Philippines, Inc. in a second audit and concluded that there is no shortage.
construction project. The subcontract was based on a Zaldarriage then moved for the dismissal of the complaint
Fixed Lump Sum of P44,223,909. However, due to some against him, however, the Office of the Ombudsman
revisions made by CNP in its designs, it incurred an rendered a decision dismissing him from service. Said
additional amount of P13,442,882 which was not re- decision was reversed on appeal, hence, the present case.
negotiated with Leighton. CNP now claims for the
payment of the additional expenses, contending that it HELD: Basic is the rule that, in administrative cases, the
was not part of the sub-contract price. Leighton however quantum of evidence necessary to find an individual
refused the same, reiterating that the sub-contract is for a administratively liable is substantial evidence. Section 5,
fixed lump sum price. The Construction Industry Rule 133 of the Rules of Court is explicit, to wit:
Arbitration
decision wasCommission
affirmed by(CIAC)
the CA.ruled
Hencein this
favor of CNP. This
petition. Sec. 5. Substantial
administrative
evidence. – In cases filed before
or quasi-judicial bodies, a fact may be
deemed established if it is supported by substantial
ISSUE: Is Leighton liable to pay the additional cost based evidence, or that amount of relevant evidence which a
on the parol evidence presented by CNP? (NO) reasonable mind might accept as adequate to justify a
conclusion .

However, a party may present evidence to

Substantial evidence does not necessarily mean modify, explain or add to the terms of the written
preponderant proof as required in ordinary civil cases, but agreement if he puts in issue in his pleading:
such kind of relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might (a) An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or
accept as adequate to support a conclusion or evidence imperfection in the written agreement;
commonly accepted by reasonably prudent men in the (b) The failure of the written agreement to
conduct of their affairs. In the present case, the evidence express the true intent and agreement of the parties
upo hih espodets adiistatie liability would be thereto;
anchored lacked that degree of certainty required in (c) The validity of the written agreement; or
administrative cases, because the entries found in the two (d) The existence of other terms agreed to by
separate audit conducted by the COA yielded conflicting the parties or their successors-in-interest after the
results. Evidence of shortage is imperative in order for the execution of the written agreement.
respondent to be held liable. In the case at bar, the The ter ageeet iludes ills.
evidence could not be relied upon. The second audit
report necessarily puts into question the reliability of the Rudlin cannot invoke the exception under (a) or (b) of the
initial audit findings. Whether the zero balance as aoe poisio. “uh eeptio otais ol hee the
appearing in the second audit report was correct or written contract is so ambiguous or obscure in terms that
inadvertently indicated, the credibility and accuracy of the the contractual intention of the parties cannot be
two audit reports were already tarnished. understood from a mere reading of the instrument. Under
the fouth eeptio, hoee, ‘udlis eidee is
FINANCIAL BUILDING CORPORATIONv. RUDLIN admissible to show the existence of such other terms
INTERNATIONAL CORPORATIONG.R. No. 164186 & agreed to by the parties after the execution of the
164347, October 4, 2010 (VILLARAMA, JR., J.) contract. But apart from the Bar Chart and Cash Flow
Chart prepared by FBC, and the testimony of Rodolfo J.
Rudlin International Corporation (Rudlin) invited Lagera, no competent evidence was adduced by Rudlin to
proposals from several contractors to undertake the prove that the amount stated in the contract was the
construction of a three-storey school building and actual decreased amount that FBC and Rudlin found
other appurtenances and the contract was eventually mutually acceptable. As to the affidavits executed by
awarded to Financial Building Corporation (FBC). The Architect Quezon and his associate Roberto R. Antonio,
project was completed, however, the balance of the the same do not serve as competent proof of the
adjusted contract price was not paid. FBC instituted a purported actual contract price as they did not testify
complaint against Rudlin and while the RTC dismissed thereon. Likewise, there is nothing in the various letters
said complaint, the CA held that FBC did not sent by Rudlin to FBC while construction was in progress
substantiate its claim against Rudlin. and even subsequent to the execution of the said Letter-
Agreement indicating that Rudlin corrected the contract
ISSUE: Is evidence of a prior or contemporaneous price which FBC had repeatedly mentioned in its letters
verbal agreement admissible to vary, contradict or and documents.
defeat the operation of a valid contract? (No)
THE HEIRS OF ROMANA SAVES,et al. v. HEIRS OF
HELD:On the issue of the correct total contract price, ECOLASTICO SAVES,et al. G.R. No. 152866, October 6,
we hold that Rudlin failed to substantiate its claim 2010 (LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.)
that the contract price stated in the Construction
Agreement was not the true contract price because it Several persons filed their respective claims before the
had a udestadig ith FBCs Jaie B. Lo that they Court of First for the titling of the respective lots they
would decrease said amount to a mutually acceptable occupy, among them were Escolastico Saves and Romana
amount. Rudlin argues that under Section 9, Rule 130, Saves. A Decision was rendered by the court, adjudicating
a party may present evidence to modify, explain or several parcels of land to different claimants.
add to the terms of the written agreement if it is put Subsequently, the heirs of Escolastico and Romana sold
in issue in the pleading. Assuming as tru e ‘udlis said property to Gaudencia Valencia. A case for
claim that the contract failed to accurately reflect an Reconveyance, Partition, and Damages was filed before
intent of the parties to fix the total contract price, the RTC on the ground that Valencia fraudulently acquired
Rudlin failed to avail of its right to seek the the properties. RTC declared the sale null and void while
reformation of the instrument to the end that such the CA reversed said decision.
true intention may be expressed. Evidence of a prior
or contemporaneous verbal agreement is generally ISSUE: Can the CA consider evidence not formally offered
not admissible to vary, contradict or defeat the before the trial court?
operation of a valid contract. Section 9 of Rule 130 of
the Rules of Court states: HELD:A formal offer is necessary because judges are
SEC. 9. Evidence of written agreements.—When the mandated to rest their findings of facts and their
terms of an agreement have been reduced to judgment only and strictly upon the evidence offered by
writing, it is considered
agreed upon as containing
and there can be, betweenallthe
theparties
terms the
judgeparties at the
to know thetrial. Its function
purpose is to enable
or purposes the trial
for which the
and their successors-in-interest, no evidence of such proponent is presenting the evidence. On the other hand,
terms other than the contents of the written this allows opposing parties to examine the evidence and
agreement. object to its admissibility. Moreover, it facilitates review
as the appellate court will not be required to review
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
documents not previously scrutinized by the trial court. documents cannot be admitted in evidence by the court
However, in People v. Napat-a, citing People v. Mate, we as the srcinal copies were neither offered nor presented
relaxed the foregoing rule and allowed evidence not for comparison and verification during the trial. Mere
formally offered to be admitted and considered by the identification of the documents and the markings thereof
trial court provided the following requirements are as exhibits do not confer any evidentiary weight on them
present, viz: first, the same must have been duly identified as said documents have not been formally offered by
by testimony duly recorded and, second, the same must petitioner and have been denied admission in evidence by
have been incorporated in the records of the case.With the CTA. Neithe ould it e said that petitioes “EC
egad to a douet etitled  Motion for the Issuance of Registration and operating permits from the CAB are
Transfer Certificate of Title  filed  Valeia i the sae documents which are of public knowledge, capable of
trial court that led to the issuance of his Title, the records unquestionable demonstration, or ought to be known to
ould sho that it is the sae douet that the heis the judges because of their judicial functions, in order to
witness Fruto Rosario identified in his testimony and allow the CTA to take discretionary judicial notice of the
marked as Exhibit I. That ol the heis ee ale to said documents.
foall offe the said otio as Ehiit I ost etail
does not mean that it can only be considered by the HEIRS OF JOSE LIMv. JULIET VILLA LIMG.R. No. 172690,
courts for the evidentiary purpose. It is well within the March 3, 2010 (NACHURA, J.)
discretion of the courts to determine whether an exhibit
indeed serves the probative purpose for which it is The heirs of the late Jose Lim filed a Complaint for
offered. It is likewise worth emphasizing that under the Partition, Accounting and Damages against Juliet Villa Lim
Revised Rules on Evidence, an admission, verbal or (Juliet), widow of the late Elfredo Lim (Elfredo), alleging
written, made by a party in the course of the proceedings that their predecessor formed a partnership with his
in the same case, does not require proof – such admission friends Jimmy Yu (Jimmy) and Norberto Uy (Norberto) to
may be contradicted only by showing that it is made engage in a trucking business. That the partners
through palpable mistake or that no such admission was purchased a truck to be used in the hauling and
made. transporting of lumber and that Jose managed the
operations of this trucking business until his death. The
SILKAIR (SINGAPORE) PTE., LTD.
v. COMMISSIONER OF business was continued and the shares in the partnership
INTERNAL REVENUEG.R. No. 184398, February 25, 2010 profits and income that formed part of the estate of Jose
(LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.) were held in trust by one of the Elfredo, with the other
heis authoit fo Elfledo to use, purchase or acquire
Silkair Singapore Pte., Ltd. (corporation) applied for a properties using said funds. The heirs contend that Elfredo
refund of excise taxes erroneously paid by it on its served as a driver in the business but was never an
purchase of aviation jet fuel from Petron. Since no action investor or a partner of the business. When the
was taken by the CIR, the corporation filed a petition for partnership ceased operations, nine trucks were
review before the CTA which held that its purchase is egisteed ude Elfedos ae. The heirs further claims
exempt from excise tax. The CTA, however, held that the that it was through the profits derived from the
corporation is not entitled to a refund for the partnership that Elfredo was able to acquire real
opoatios failue to peset poof that it as properties and 5 motor vehicles. When Elfredo passed
authorized to do business in the Philippines due to the away, the heirs claimed that they are co-owners of the
non-admission of some of its exhibits for being mere properties, hence, the present case. Juliet claims that
photocopies of srcinal documents. Elfedo as a pate pe testio of Ceseia Joses
wife), Elfredo contributed to the capital of the
ISSUE: Was Silkair able to prove its authority to do partnership, hence, an informal partnership was formed.
business in the Philippines? (No) That Other than the trucking business, Elfledo, together
with respondent, engaged in other business ventures.
HELD:Petitioes assetio that the CTA a take judiial Thus, they were able to buy real properties and to put up
notice of its SEC Registration, previously offered and their own car assembly and repair business. Juliet further
admitted in evidence in similar cases before the CTA, is stated that when Jose died, he left no properties that
untenable. Evidence already presented and admitted by Elfredo could have held in trust. The heirs argue that
the court in a previous case cannot be adopted in a according to the testimony of Jimmy, the sole surviving
separate case pending before the same court without the partner, Elfledo was not a partner; and that he and
same being offered and identified anew. A court is not Norberto entered into a partnership with Jose. Thus, the
compelled to take judicial notice of pieces of evidence CA erred in not giving that testimony greater weight than
offered and admitted in a previous case unless the same that of Cresencia, who was merely the spouse of Jose and
are properly offered or have accordingly complied with not a party to the partnership.
the requirements on the rules of evidence. It is an
elementary rule in law that documents shall not be ISSUE:Can the testimony of one of the heirs be given
admissible in evidence unless and until the srcinal copies greater weight than that by a former partner on the issue
itself are offered or presented for verification in cases of the identity of the other partners in the partnership?
where
providedmere
for copies
by law.are offered,
Silkair thus save forhide
cannot the behind
exceptions
the
(No)
veil of judicial notice so as to evade its responsibility of HELD: Undoubtedly, the best evidence would have been
properly complying with the rules of evidence. For its the contract of partnership or the articles of partnership.
failure to compare the subject documents with its Unfortunately, there is none in this case, because the
srcinals, the same may not be admitted. Evidently, said alleged partnership was never formally organized.

Nonetheless, we are asked to determine who between of evidence that between documentary and oral evidence,
Jose ad Elfledo as the pate i the tukig the former carries more weight.
business. A careful review of the records persuades us to
affirm the CA decision. The evidence presented by the PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINESv. ALBERT SANCHEZ y
heirs falls short of the quantum of proof required to GALERA G.R. No. 188610, June 29, 2010 (VELASCO, JR., J.)
establish that: (1) Jose was the partner and not Elfledo;
and (2) all the properties acquired by Elfledo and Albert Sanchez y Galera stealthily entered the residence of
respondent form part of the estate of Jose, having been the De Leon family where he stabbed and succeeded in
derived from the alleged partnership. The heirs heavily killing some of the family members. The records
rely on Jimmy's testimony. But that testimony is just one established that when the mother discovered that her son
piece of evidence against Juliet. In civil cases, the party was bathed in blood the son uttered that, "Mama, si Kuya
having the burden of proof must establish his case by a Albert sinaksak ako". The RTC convicted Sanchez of two
preponderance of evidence. "Preponderance of evidence" counts of murder and two counts of frustrated murder.
is the weight, credit, and value of the aggregate evidence
on either side and is usually considered synonymous with ISSUE:Is the sos fial ods to his othe adissile as
the term "greater weight of the evidence" or "greater evidence?
weight of the credible evidence." "Preponderance of
evidence" is a phrase that, in the last analysis, means HELD: What Jufer uttered just before he expired - "Mama,
probability of the truth. It is evidence that is more si Kuya Albert, sinaksak ako"- is admissible in evidence
convincing to the court as worthy of belief than that which against the appellant pursuant to Section 37, Rule 130 of
is offered in opposition thereto. Rule 133, Section 1 of the the Rules of Court.
Rules of Court provides the guidelines in determining Sec. 37. Dying declaration. — The declaration of a dying
preponderance of evidence, thus: person, made under the consciousness of an impending
SECTION I. Preponderance of evidence, how death, may be received in any case wherein his death is
determined. In civil cases, the party having burden of the subject of inquiry, as evidence of the cause and
proof must establish his case by a preponderance of surrounding circumstances of such death.
evidence. In determining where the preponderance or
superior weight of evidence on the issues involved lies, A dying declaration is an evidence of the highest order; it
the court may consider all the facts and circumstances is entitled to the utmost credence on the premise that no
of the case, the witnesses' manner of testifying, their one person who knows of his impending death would
intelligence, their means and opportunity of knowing make a careless and false accusation. At the brink of
the facts to which they are testifying, the nature of the death, all thoughts of concocting lies disappear.
facts to which they testify, the probability or
improbability of their testimony, their interest or want SPOUSES MANUEL and VICTORIA SALIMBANGON v.
of interest, and also their personal credibility so far as SPOUSES SANTOS AND ERLINDA TAN
G.R. No. 185240,
the same may legitimately appear upon the trial. The January 20, 2010 (ABAD, J.)
court may also consider the number of witnesses,
though the preponderance is not necessarily with the Guillermo Ceniza died intestate and his children, including
greater number. herein petitioner Victoria Salimbangon, executed an
extrajudicial declaration of heirs and partition,
Applying the legal provision to the facts of this case, the adjudicating and dividing the land among themselves. To
following circumstances tend to prove that Elfledo was give the interior lots access to the street, the heirs
himself the partner of Jimmy and Norberto: 1) Cresencia annotated an easement of right of way consisting of a 3-
testified that Jose gave Elfledo money, as share in the meter wide alley across the property. But, realizing that
partnership, on a date that coincided with the payment of the partition resulted in an unequal division of the
the initial capital in the partnership; (2) Elfledo ran the property, the heirs modified their agreement by
affairs of the partnership, wielding absolute control, eliminating the easement of right of way and in its place,
power and authority, without any intervention or imposed a 3-meter wide alley, an easement of right of
opposition whatsoever from any of the heirs; (3) all of the way, that ran exclusively along the southwest boundary of
properties, particularly the nine trucks of the partnership, the property. Victoria and her husband constructed a
were registered in the name of Elfledo; (4) Jimmy testified residential house on this lot and built two garages on it.
that Elfledo did not receive wages or salaries from the One garage abutted the street while the other used the
partnership, indicating that what he actually received alley or easement of right of way which was cemented
were shares of the profits of the business; and (5) none of and gated by Victoria. The remaining lots were brought by
the heirs, the alleged partner, demanded periodic Spouses Santos and Erlinda Tan who also built
accounting from Elfledo during his lifetime. As repeatedly improvements on the easement and closed the gate that
stressed in Heirs of Tan Eng Kee v. CA, a demand for Victoria built. Unable to use the old right of way, the
periodic accounting is evidence of a partnership. Victoria lodged a complaint with the City Engineer against
Furthermore, the heirs failed to adduce any evidence to the Tans. On the other hand, the Tans filed an action with
show that the real and personal properties acquired and the RTC against Victoria for the extinguishment of the
registered in the
of the estate of names of Elfledo
Jose, having andderived
been Juliet formed part
from Jose's easement with preliminary injunction. RTC upheld
Vitoias easeet of ight of a oe the popet
alleged partnership with Jimmy and Norberto. They failed belong to the Tans. The CA reversed said ruling and
to refute Juliet's claim that Elfledo and Juliet were extinguished the easement based on the testimony of one
engaged in other businesses. Thus, we apply the basic rule of the previous owners, Eduardo Ceniza, the true intent of
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
the parties was to establish that easement of right of way In 1991, Estrellita Vizconde and her daughters Carmela,
for the benefit of the interior lots. nineteen years old, and Jennifer, seven, were brutally slain
at their home in Parañaque City. Four years later, the NBI
ISSUE:Can parole evidence be admitted in an action for announced that it had solved the crime. It presented star-
extinguishment of easement of right of way? witness Jessica M. Alfaro, one of its informers, who
claimed that she witnesses the crime. She pointed to the
HELD:The parole evidence rule, said the Victoria, aused Huet Jeffe P. We, Atoio To Bo
precluded the parties from introducing testimony that Lejao, Ateio Dog Vetua, Mihael A. Gathalia,
tended to alter or modify what the parties had agreed on Hospiio Pke Feadez, Pete Estada, Miguel Gig
above. But the exclusionary provision of the parole Rodriguez, and Joey Filart as the culprits. She also tagged
evidence rule admits of exceptions. Section 9, Rule 130 of accused police officer, Gerardo Biong, as an accessory
the Revised Rules on Evidence states: afte the fat. ‘elig piail o Alfaos testio, o
Sec. 9. Evidence of written agreements. - When the August 10, 1995, the public prosecutors filed information
terms of an agreement have been reduced to writing, for rape with homicide against Webb, et al.
it is considered as containing all the terms agreed upon
and there can be, between the parties and their The RTC of Parañaque presided over by Judge Amelita G.
successors in interest, no evidence of such terms other Tolentino tried only seven of the accused since Artemio
than the contents of the written agreement. However, Ventura and Joey Filart remained at large. The
a party may present evidence to modify, explain or a dd prosecution presented Alfaro as its main witness with the
to the terms of the written agreement if he puts in others corroborating her testimony. These included the
issue in his pleading: medico-legal officer who autopsied the bodies of the
(a) An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection victims, the security guards of Pitong Daan Subdivision,
in the written agreement; the foe laudoa of Wes household, polie
(b) The failure of the written agreement to offie Biogs foe gilfied, and Lauro G. Vizconde,
express the true intent and agreement of the parties Estellitas husad.
thereto;
(c) The validity of the written agreement; or For their part, some of the accused testified, denying any
(d) The existence of other terms agreed to by the part in the crime and saying they were elsewhere when it
parties or their successors in interest after the took plae. Wes alii appeaed the stogest sie he
execution of the written agreement. claimed that he was then in the United States of America.
He presented the testimonies of witnesses as well as
The te ageeet iludes ills. Hee, the Tas had documentary and object evidence to prove this. In
put in issue the true intent and agreement of the parties addition, the defense presented witnesses to show
to the partition when they alleged that the easement was Alfaos ad eputatio fo tuth ad the iedile atue
actually for both Victoria and Eduado Ceizas eefit. of her testimony.
Consequently, with the above averment, the Tans were
entitled to introduce evidence to establish the true intent The trial court found a credible witness in Alfaro. It noted
and agreement of the parties although this may depart her categorical straightforward, spontaneous and frank
from what the partition agreement literally provided. At testimony, undamaged by grueling cross-examinations.
any rate, as the CA said, the Victoria did not object at the
heaig to adissio of Eduado Ceizas testio ee The RTC rendered judgment, finding all the accused guilty
when this seemed at variance, as far as they were as charged and imposing on Webb, Lejano, Gatchalian,
concerned, with the partition agreement among the heirs. Fernandez, Estrada and Rodriguez the penalty of reclusion
Consequently, the Victoria may also be deemed to have perpetua and on Biong, an indeterminate prison term of
waived their right to now question such testimony on eleven years, four months and one day to twelve years.
appeal. The point is that, obviously, in establishing the O appeal, the Cout of Appeals affied ‘TCs deisio.
new easement of right of way, the heirs intended to
abandon the old one. And, with the ownership of the In 2010, as a result of its initial deliberation in this case,
property now consolidated in a common owner, namely, the Court issued a Resolution granting the request of
the Tans, then the easement of right of way may be said Webb to submit for DNA Analysis the semen specimen
to have been extinguished by operation of law. take fo Caelas adae, hih speie as the
believed still under the safekeeping of NBI.
G.R. No.
ANTONIO LEJANOv. PEOPE OF THE PHILIPPINES
176389, 14 December 2010 (Abad, J.) Unfortunately, the NBI informed the Court that it no
longer has custody of the specimen, the same having been
Alfao as the NBIs sta itess, their badge of excellent turned over to the trial court. The trial court record
investigative work. After claiming that they had solved the shows, however, that the specimen was not among the
crime of the decade, the NBI people had a stake in making object evidence that the prosecution offered in evidence
her sound credible, and obviously, they gave her all the in the case. This outcome prompted the accused Webb to
preparations she needed for the job of becoming a fairly file an urgent motion to acquit on the ground that the
good sustitute itess. “he as thei dalig of a goeets failue to pesee suh ital eidee has
asset. And this is not pure speculation. As pointed out resulted in the denial of his right to due process.
above, Sacaguing of the NBI, a lawyer and a ranking
official confirmed this to be a cold fact. Why the trial court ISSUES:
and Court of Appeals failed to see this is mystifying. 1. Whethe o ot Alfaos testio as
eyewitness is entitled to belief

2. Whethe o ot Wes piees of eidee ae Gatchalian, Fernandez, Estrada, and Rodriguez supposedly
poe suffiiet eough to eut Alfaos staed aoud Alfaos a, hih as paked o the
testimony steet etee Caelas house ad the et. “oe of
these e sat o top of the as lid hile othes illed
HELD: CA Decision REVERSED and SET ASIDE. on the sidewalk, visible under the street light to anyone
who cared to watch them, particularly to the people who
Alfaro’s testio as eeitess were having a drinking party in a nearby house. Obviously,
the ehaio of Wes opaios out o the steet did
But was it possible for Alfaro to lie with such abundant not figure in a planned gang-rape of Carmela.
details some of which even tallied with the physical
evidence at the scene of the crime? No doubt, yes. Two. Vetua, Alfaos dope supplie, itodued he fo
the first time in her life to Webb and his friends in a
The Vizconde massacre had been reported in the media parking lot by a mall. So why would she agree to act as
with dizzying details. Everybody was talking about what Wes essege, usig he gas, to ig his essage to
the police found at the crime scene and there were lots of Carmela at her home. More inexplicably, what motivated
speculations about them. Alfaro to stick it out the whole night with Webb and his
friends?
Alfao as the NBIs sta itess, thei adge of eellet
investigative work.lavvphil After claiming that they had They were practically strangers to her and her boyfriend
solved the crime of the decade, the NBI people had a Estrada. When it came to a point that Webb decided with
stake in making her sound credible and, obviously, they his friends to gang-rape Carmela, clearly, there was
gave her all the preparations she needed for the job of nothing in it for Alfaro. Yet, she stuck it out with them, as
becoming a fairly good substitute witness. She was their a police asset would, hanging in there until she had a
"darling" of an asset. And this is not pure speculation. As crime to report, only she was not yet an "asset" then. If,
pointed out above, Sacaguing of the NBI, a lawyer and a on the other hand, Alfaro had been too soaked in drugs to
ranking official, confirmed this to be a cold fact. Why the think clearly and just followed along where the group took
trial court and the Court of Appeals failed to see this is her, how could she remember so much details that only a
mystifying. drug-free mind can?
At any rate, did Alfaro at least have a fine memory for Three. When Alfaro went to see Carmela at her house for
faces that had a strong effect on her, given the the second time, Carmella told her that she still had to go
circumstances? Not likely. She named Miguel "Ging" out and that Webb and his friends should come back
Rodriguez as one of the culprits in the Vizconde killings. around midnight. Alfaro returned to her car and waited
But when the NBI found a certain Michael Rodriguez, a for Carmela to drive out in her own car. And she trailed
drug dependent from the Bicutan Rehabilitation Center, her up to Aguirre Avenue where she supposedly dropped
initially suspected to e Alfaos Miguel ‘odiguez ad off a a ho she thought as Caelas ofiend.
showed him to Alfaro at the NBI office, she ran berserk, Alfaos tailig Caela to sp o he ufaithfuless to
slapping and kicking Michael, exclaiming: "How can I Webb did not make sense since she was on limited errand.
forget your face. We just saw each other in a disco one But, as a critical witness, Alfaro had to provide a reason
month ago and you told me then that you will kill me." As for Webb to freak out and decide to come with his friends
it turned out, he was not Miguel Rodriguez, the accused in and harm Carmela.
this case.
Four. According to Alfaro, when they returned to
Two possibilities exist: Michael was really the one Alfaro Caelas house the thid tie aoud idight, she led
wanted to implicate to settle some score with him but it Webb, Lejano, and Ventura through the pedestrian gate
was too late to change the name she already gave or she that Carmela had left open. Now, this is weird. Webb was
had myopic vision, tagging the wrong people for what the gang leader who decided what they were going to do.
they did not do. He decided and his friends agreed with him to go to
Caelas house ad gag-rape her. Why would Alfaro, a
There is another thing about a lying witness: her story woman, a stranger to Webb before that night, and
lacks sense or suffers from inherent inconsistencies. An obviously with no role to play in the gang-rape of Carmela,
understanding of the nature of things and the common lead him and the others into her house? It made no sense.
behavior of people will help expose a lie. And it has an It would only make sense if Alfaro wanted to feign being a
abundant presence in this case. witness to something she did not see.
One. In her desire to implicate Gatchalian, Fernandez, Five. Alfaro went out of the house to smoke at the garden.
Estrada, Rodriguez, and Filart, who were supposed to be After about twenty minutes, a woman exclaimed, "Sino
Wes o-principals in the crime, Alfaro made it a point yan?" On hearing this, Alfaro immediately walked out of
to testify that Webb proposed twice to his friends the the garden and went to her car. Apparently, she did this
gang-rape of Carmela who had hurt him. And twice, they because she knew they came on a sly. Someone other
(including, if one
Estrada) agreed in abelieves
chorus toAlfaro, her own
his proposal. boyfriend
But when they than Carmelainbecame
and others conscious
the house. Alfaroofwalked
the presence of Webb
away because,
got to Caelas house, ol We, Lejao, Vetua, ad obviously, she did not want to get involved in a potential
Alfaro entered the house. confrontation. This was supposedly her frame of mind:
fear of getting involved in what was not her business.
REMEDIALLAW TEAM:
EVIDENCE
But if that were the case, how could she testify based on possibilities, but whether it entertains a reasonable,
personal knowledge of what went on in the house? Alfaro lingering doubt as to his guilt. For, it would be a serious
had to change that frame of mind to one of boldness and mistake to send an innocent man to jail where such kind
reckless curiosity. So that is what she next claimed. She of dout hags o to oes ie eig, like a piee of
went back into the house to watch as Webb raped meat lodged immovable between teeth.
Caela o the floo of the astes edoo. He had
apparently staed to death Caelas o ad he Will the Court send the accused to spend the rest of their
young sister whose bloodied bodies were sprawled on the lives in prison on the testimony of an NBI asset who
bed. Now, Alfaro testified that she got scared (another proposed to her handlers that she take the role of the
shift to fear) for she hurriedly got out of the house after witness to the Vizconde massacre that she could not
Webb supposedly gave her a meaningful look. produce?
Alfaro quickly went to her car, not minding Gatchalian,

Fernandez, Estrada, Rodriguez, and Filart who sat on the
car or milled on the sidewalk. She did not speak to them,
even to Estrada, her boyfriend. She entered her car and
turned on the engine but she testified that she did not
know where to go. This woman who a few minutes back
led Webb, Lejano, and Ventura into the house, knowing
that they were decided to rape and harm Carmela, was
suddenly too shocked to know where to go! This
emotional pendulum swing indicates a witness who was
confused with her own lies.
We’s Aliis to Reut Alfaro’s Testio
Among the accused, it was Webb who presented the

strongest alibi. His travel preparations were confirmed by
Rajah Tours and the Philippine immigration, confirming
that he indeed left for San Francisco, California with his
Aunt Gloria on March 9, 1991 on board the United Airlines
Flight 808. His passport was stamped and his name was
listed o the Uited Ailies Flights Passege Maifest.
Upon reaching US, the US immigration recorded his entry
to the country. Moreover, details of his very stay there,
including his logs and paychecks when he worked,
documents when he purchased a car and his license were
presented as additional evidence, and he left for
Philippines on October 26, 1992. Supreme Court accused
the trial court and the Court of Appeals as having a mind
that is made cynical by the rule drilled into his head that a
defese of alii is a hagas oose i the faes of a
itess sueakig I sa hi do it. A judge, aodig to
the Court, must keep an open mind, and must guard
against slipping into hasty conclusions arising from a
desire to quickly finish the job of deciding a case.
For positive identification to be credible, two criteria must

be met: 1.) the positive identification of the offender must
oe fo a edile itess . the itess sto of
what she personally saw must be believable, not
inherently contrived.
For alibi to be credible and established on the other hand,

it must be positive, clear and documented. It must show
that it was physically impossible for him to be at the scene
of the ie. We as ale to estalish his aliis
credibility with his documents. It is impossible for Webb,
despite his so called power and connections to fix a
foeig ailies passege aifest. Wes depatue
and arrival
Attorney were and
General authenticated by the Office of the US
the State D epartment.
In our criminal justice system, what is important is, not

whether the court entertains doubts about the innocence
of the accused since an open mind is willing to explore all


UST Golden Notes - Evidence-Libre PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

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

UST Golden Notes - Evidence-Libre PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

UST GOLDEN NOTES 2011

EVIDENCE A: No. Any evidence inadmissible according to the

A: The party having the The guilt of the accused

Q: What is the scope of the Rules of Evidence? 5. FACTUM PROBANSVERSUSFACTUM

6. ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE of exception to the general admissibility

Q: What is the dotie of Fuit of the Poisoous

A: The doctrine speaks of that illegally seized A:

evidence 2007). It may be deduced from the acts of the

Q: Distinguish direct evidence from circumstantial of a fact and

Q: When is circumstantial evidence sufficient to A:

A: Q: What is the test to determine where the burden

CRIMINAL CASE aditted the killig. (Cabuslay v. People and

Q: Who has the burden of proof if the accused A:

A: One who invokes self-defense admits Q: What is presumption?

Q: Distinguish the classes of presumptions. in derogation of the deed, or from denying

2. Estoppel by deed – A party to a property

Q: What are the disputable presumptions under the latter.

absence of 10 years is required; and if he

necessarily incident to the proper conduct of the law or fact.

their corresponding shares including joint marriage.

subsequent marriage 300 days after

>15 and < 60 >15 and < 60

10. QUANTUM OF EVIDENCE (WEIGHT AND

Q: Define weight of evidence.

A: It is the probative value given by the court to

Q: When is evidence credible?

A: It is credible if it is admissible and believable and

ACADEMICSCHAIR: LESTER JAY ALAN E. FLORES II

credible in itself. It must be natural, reasonable and

Q: What is motive? A: It is a means of identifying a suspect of a crime

and reliable? the control and management of the

ACADEMICSCHAIR: LESTER JAY ALAN E. FLORES II

was raped and consequently subject herself to an

A: It is not sufficient ground for conviction unless

Q: What are the elements of corpus delicti?

A: Yes. In rape cases, the lone testimony of the

A: Yes. When the identity of the accused is not A:

SC in Cual v. Leonis Navigation, G.R. No. 3. It must be dispute

Q: What is judicial notice? Q: In discretionary judicial notice, when is

Note: Hearing is necessary in the foregoing instances A:

Q: What is mandatory notice? Do not require proof and consideration

Q: What is judicial admission? Q: What remedy is available to a party who gave a

ACADEMICSCHAIR: LESTER JAY ALAN E. FLORES II

Q: How can judicial admission be contradicted?

GR: Courts are not authorized to take judicial to make hisillogical

XPNS: Note: All courts must take judicial notice of the

A: A: No. If a view of the object is necessary in the

A: A: No. Photographs, when presented in evidence,

traces of nitrates therefrom (People v. Brecinio, G.R. requires

Q: When is there a need to establish a chain of

c. POST-CONVICTION DNA TESTING; REMEDY Q: What are the things to be considered in

ACADEMICSCHAIR: LESTER JAY ALAN E. FLORES II

e. RULES ON EVALUATION OF RELIABILITY OF THE A:

3. The general acceptance of the principles or

Q: What are the requisites for admissibility of Q: When is this applicable?

Alternative Answer: A: Yes. As a rule, forgery cannot be presumed and

Q: What is the best evidence of telegrams and A:

ACADEMICSCHAIR: LESTER JAY ALAN E. FLORES II

A: Thee ae thee oepts of oigial douet:

Q: How may the loss or destruction

inference against him. It only authorizes the

A: An electronic document is admissible in evidence

ACADEMICSCHAIR: LESTER JAY ALAN E. FLORES II