Evidence Printable PDF

ATENEO CENTRAL BAR OPERATIONS 2007
Remedial Law
SUMMER REVIEWER
¾ In quasi-judicial proceedings, the rules of

evidence shall apply by analogy, or in a suppletory
character and whenever practicable and convenient
EVIDENCE except where the governing law on that particular
proceeding specifically adopts the rules of evidence
in the Rules of Court.
¾ In cases before the Court of Agrarian

Relations, the Rules of Court were not applicable
RULE 128 even in a suppletory character, except in criminal and
GENERAL PROVISIONS expropriation cases, which procedure has been
superseded by the provisions of RA 6657.
Section 1. Evidence defined
CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE ACCORDING TO
Section 2. Scope FORM
PROOF - the result or effect of evidence. When the 1. OBJECTIVE OR REAL EVIDENCE – directly
requisite quantum of evidence of a particular fact has addressed to the senses of the court and
been duly admitted and given weight, the result is consist of tangible things exhibited or
called the proof of such fact. demonstrated in open court, in an ocular
inspection, or at place designated by the
FACTUM PROBANDUM court for its view or observation of an
- the ultimate fact or the fact sought to be exhibition, experiment or demonstration. This
established. is referred to as autoptic preference.
- Refers to proposition
2. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE – evidence
FACTUM PROBANS supplied by written instruments or derived
- is the evidentiary fact or the fact by which the from conventional symbols, such as letters,
factum probandum is to be established. by which ideas are represented on material
- Materials which establish the proposition. substances
¾ The law of evidence is fundamentally a 3. TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE – is that which is

procedural law. submitted to the court through the testimony
or deposition of a witness.
¾ In criminal cases, if the alteration of these
rules may validly be made applicable to cases RELEVANT, MATERIAL AND COMPETENT
pending at the time of such change, as the parties to EVIDENCE
an action have no vested right in the rules of
evidence. RELEVANT EVIDENCE – evidence having any value
in reason as tending to prove any matter provable in
¾ In criminal cases, if the alteration of these an action. The test is the logical relation of the
rules of evidence would, for and
QuickTime™ instance,
a permit the evidentiary fact to the fact in issue, whether the
TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
reception of a lesser quantum
are needed to see thisof evidence than what
picture. former tends to establish the probability or
the law required at the time of the commission of the improbability of the latter.
offense in order to convict, then the retroactive
application of such amendatory law would be MATERIAL EVIDENCE – evidence directed to prove
unconstitutional for being ex post facto. a fact in issue as determined by the rules of
substantive law and pleadings. The test is whether
¾ The rules of evidence are specifically the fact it intends to prove is an issue or not. AS to
applicable only in judicial proceedings. whether a fact is in issue or not is in turn determined
by the substantive law, the pleadings, the pre-trial
order and by the admissions or confessions on file.
—Advisers: Atty. Tranquil Salvador III; Head: Mary Elizabeth M. Belmonte, Renee Lynn C. Miciano, Ma. Cecillia G.
Natividad; Understudies: Neliza Macapayag, Benjamin C. Yan—
Criminal Law Summer Reviewer
Consequently, evidence may be relevant but may be total disclaimer of persona knowledge, hence without
immaterial in the case. any representation or disavowal that the fact in
question could or could not have existed or
COMPETENT EVIDENCE– one that is not excluded happened. It is admissible only if it tends to contradict
by this Rules, a stature or the Constitution. positive evidence of the other side or would tend to
exclude the existence of fact sworn to by the other
DIRECT AND CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE side.
DIRECT EVIDENCE – that which proves the fact in What do the rules of evidence determine?
dispute without the aid of any inference or All rights and liabilities are dependent upon and arise
presumption out of facts.
CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE - is the proof of a Every judicial proceeding whatever has for its
fact or facts from which taken either singly or purpose the ascertaining of some right or liability. If
collectively, the existence or a particular fact in the proceeding is Criminal, the object is to ascertain
dispute may be inferred as a necessary or probable the liability to punishment of the person accused. If
consequence. the proceeding is Civil, the object is to ascertain
some right of property or status, or the right of one
CUMULATIVE AND CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE party and the liability of other to some form of relief.
CUMULATIVE EVIDENCE – evidence of the same Two branches of the law of procedure
kind and to the same state of facts. 1. The law of the pleadings which determines
the questions in a dispute between the
CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE – is additional parties
evidence of a difference character to the same point. 2. The law of evidence, which determines how
the party can convince the court of the
PRIMA FACIE AND CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE existence of facts which according to the
provisions of substantive law, would establish
PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE – that which is standing the existence of the right or liability which
alone, unexplained or uncontradicted, is sufficient to they allege to exist.
maintain the proposition affirmed.
Why should the rule of evidence be uniform?
CONCLUSVE EVIDENCE – the class of evidence 1. the relation between the evidentiary fact and
which the law does not allow to be contradicted. a particular proposition is always the same,
without regard to the kind of litigation in
which that proposition becomes material to
PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EVIDENCE
be proved.
2. if the rules of evidence prescribe the best
PRIMARY EVIDENCE – that which the law regards
course to arrive at the truth, that must be and
as affording the greatest certainty of the fact in
are the same in all civilized countries.
question. Also referred to as the best evidence.
Differences in the Rules of Evidence in Criminal
SECONDARY EVIDENCE – that which is inferior to
and Civil Cases
the primary evidence and is permitted by law only
CIVIL CRIMINAL
when the best evidence is not available. Known as
Parties attend by The accused attends
the substitutionary evidence.
accord by compulsion
QuickTime™ and a There is no Presumption of
POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE
TIFF (Uncompressed)EVIDENCE
decompressor
are needed to see this picture. presumption as to innocence attends the
either party accused throughout
POSITIVE EVIDENCE – when the witness affirms
the trial until the same
that a fact did or did not occur. Entitled to a greater
has been overcome by
weight since the witness represents of his personal
prima facie evidence
knowledge the presence or absence of a fact.
of his guilt
An offer to It is an implied
NEGATIVE EVIDENCE - when the witness did not
compromise does not, admission of guilt.
see or know of the occurrence of a fact. There is a
as a general rule,
Page 240 of 289

amount to an Section 4. Relevancy; collateral matters.

admission of liability
2 AXIOMS OF ADMISSIBILITY
Must prove by Guilt beyond 1. None but facts having rational probative
preponderance of reasonable doubt value are admissible
evidence: Reason is 2. all facts having rational probative value are
that there is no admissible unless some specific rule forbids
presumption and due their admission.
to the fact that the
proof will only result in The Admissibility of Evidence is Determined at
a judgment of the Time it is Offered to the Court
pecuniary damages or When offered When may be
establish CIVIL objected
RIGHT. When the same Be made either
is presented for at the the time it
Any evidence inadmissible according to the laws in its view or is presented in
force at the time the action accrued, but admissible evaluation, as in an ocular
according to the laws in force at the time of the trial, ocular inspection inspection or
is receivable. There is no vested right of property in Object or demonstrations
rules of evidence. evidence demonstrations, or when it is
or when the formally offered
¾ Reason: The rules of evidence are merely party rest his
methods for ascertaining facts. It must be case and the
supposed that change of law merely makes it real evidence
more likely that the fact will be truly ascertained, consists of
either by admitting evidence whose former objects exhibited
suppression or by suppressing evidence helped in court.
to conceal the truth. By calling of the As to the
witness to the qualification of
There are rules of evidence established merely for stand the witness –
the protection of the parties. If according to the well- should be made
established doctrine, the parties may waive such at the time he is
rules during the trial of a case, there is no reason why called to the
they cannot make the waiver in a contract. However, stand.
if the rule of evidence waived by the parties has been If otherwise
established by law on grounds of public policy, the qualified -
waiver is void. objection should
Testimonial be raised when
Trial courts are enjoined to observe the strict evidence the
enforcement of the rules of evidence which objectionable
crystallized through constant use and practice and question is
are very useful and effective aids in the search for asked or after
truth and for the effective administration of justice. the answer is
But in connection with evidence which may appear to given if the
be of doubtful relevancy or incompetence or objectionable
admissibility, it is safest policy to be liberal, not features became
rejecting them onTIFFdoubtful or technical
QuickTime™ and a grounds, but apparent by
(Uncompressed) decompressor
admitting them unless plainly
are needed irrelevant,
to see this picture. immaterial or reason of such
incompetent, for the reason that their rejection places answer.
them beyond the consideration of the court, if they Formally offered At the time it is
are thereafter found relevant or competent; on the Documentar by the proponent formally offered.
other hand, their admission, if they turn out later to be y evidence immediately
irrelevant or incompetent, can easily be remedied by before he rests
completely discarding them or ignoring them. his case.
Section. 3 Admissibility of evidence.
Page 241 of 289

¾ Every objection to the admissibility of evidence What should determine the application of the rule
shall be made at the time such evidence is of curative admissibility:
offered, or as soon thereafter as the objection to
its admissibility shall have become apparent, 1) whether the incompetent evidence was
otherwise the objection shall be considered seasonably objected to
waived. 2) whether, regardless of the objection, the
admission of such evidence shall cause a
CERTAIN DOCTRINES OR RULES OF plain and unfair prejudice to the party against
ADMISSIBILITY whom it is admitted.
1. Conditional admissibility The evidence which was illegally obtained is

inadmissible on a timely motion or action to suppress.
Where the evidence at the time of its offer
appears to be immaterial or irrelevant unless it is The rules prohibit the admission of irrelevant
connected with the other facts to be subsequently collateral facts only.
proved, such evidence may be received ob condition
that the other facts will be proved thereafter, Circumstantial evidence is legal evidence and if
otherwise the evidence given will be stricken out. sufficient, can sustain a judgment. Circumstantial
This is subject to the qualification that there should evidence is evidence of relevant collateral facts.
be no bad faith on the part of the proponent.
ISSUE – is the point or points in question, at the
2. Multiple admissibility conclusion of the pleadings which one side affirms,
and the other side denies.
Where the evidence is relevant and competent
for two or more purposes, such evidence should be FACT – thing done or existing.
admitted for any or all the purposes for which it is
offered provided it satisfies all the requirements of FACTS IN ISSUE - are those facts which the plaintiff
law for its admissibility therefore. must prove in order to establish his claim and those
facts which the defendant must prove in order to
3. Curative admissibility establish a defense set up by him, but only when the
fact alleged by the one party is not admitted by the
This treats upon the right of the party to introduce other party..
incompetent evidence in his behalf where the court
has admitted the same kind of evidence adduced by FACTS RELEVANT TO THE ISSUE - are those facts
the adverse party. which render the probable existence or non-existence
of a fact in issue, or some other relevant fact.
Three theories on curative admissibility:
The effect of the pleadings is that they help in
a. American rule – the admission of determining whether the evidence offered is relevant
such incompetent evidence, without to the case, for it is a familiar proposition that the
objection by the opponent does not evidence must be confined to the facts put in issue by
justify such opponent in rebutting it the pleadings.
by similar incompetent evidence.
b. English rule – if a party has

presented inadmissible evidence, the RULE 129
adverseQuickTime™
party and may a resort to similar WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED
inadmissible
are needed to seeevidence
this picture.
Section 1. Judicial Notice, when mandatory

c. Massachusetts rule – the adverse
party may be permitted to introduce JUDICIAL NOTICE – no more than that the court will
similar incompetent evidence in bring to its aid and consider, without proof of the
order to avoid a plain and unfair facts, its knowledge of those matters of public
prejudice caused by the admission of concern which are known by all well-informed
the other party’s evidence. persons.
Page 242 of 289

- cognizance of certain facts which judges may take

and act on without proof because they are already The doctrine of judicial notice rests on the wisdom
known to them and discretion of the courts. The power to take
judicial notice is to be exercised by courts with
The object of judicial notice is to save time, labor caution; care must be taken that the requisite
and expense in securing and introducing evidence on notoriety exists; and every reasonable doubt upon
matters which are not ordinarily capable of dispute the subject should be promptly resolved in the
and not actually bona fide disputed, and the tenor of negative.
which can safely be assumed form the tribunal’s
general knowledge or from slight search on its part. Foreign laws may not be taken judicial notice of and
have to be proved like any other fact EXCEPT where
Judicial notice is based on convenience and said laws are within the actual knowledge of the court
expediency. such as when they are well and generally known or
they have been actually ruled upon in other cases
Two kinds of judicial notice before it and none of the parties claim otherwise.
1) mandatory
2) discretionary To prove a written foreign law, the requirements
must be complied with, that is, by an official
The direct effect of judicial notice upon the burden of publication or by a duly attested and authenticated
proving a fact is to relieve the parties from the copy thereof.
necessity of introducing evidence to prove the fact
noticed. It makes evidence unnecessary. DOCTRINE OF PROCESSUAL PRESUMPTION –
absent any of the evidence or admission, the foreign
The stipulation and admission of the parties or law is presumed to be the same as that in the
counsel cannot prevail over the operation of the Philippines.
doctrine of judicial notice, and such stipulation and
admissions are all subject to the operation of the Section 3. Judicial notice, when hearing
doctrine. necessary
Municipal trial courts are required to take judicial The purpose of the hearing is not for the presentation
notice of the ordinances of the municipality or city of evidence but to afford the parties reasonable
wherein they sit. opportunity to present information relevant to the
proprietary of taking such judicial notice or to the
In the RTC, they must take such judicial notice tenor of the matter to be noticed.
only
1. when required to do so by statute and What stage may the court take judicial notice of a
2. in a case on appeal before them and wherein fact?
the inferior court took judicial notice of an 1. During trial
ordinance involved in said case. 2. after trial and before judgment
3. appeal
Courts are required to take judicial notice of the
decisions of the appellate courts but not of the A DISTINCTION is made between judicial notice
decisions of coordinate trial courts taken during trial and that taken after trial but before
judgment or on appeal.
Section 2. Judicial Notice, when discretionary .
During the trial: the Court may announce its
The mere personal knowledge QuickTime™ of and athe judge is not the intention to take judicial notice of any matter and may
judicial knowledge of the court;
are needed to see this Judicial
picture. cognizance is hear the parties thereon.
taken only of those matters which are commonly
known. After trial but before judgment or on
appeal: the Court may take judicial notice of any
It is not essential that matters of judicial cognizance matter and allow the parties to be heard thereon if
be actually known to the judge if the subject is proper such matter is decisive of a material issue in the case
for judicial knowledge, the judge may at his
discretion, inform himself in any way which may ¾ The judge may consult works on collateral
seem best to him, and act accordingly. science, or arts, touching the topic on trial.
Page 243 of 289

Section 4. Judicial Admissions. The fact that an ocular inspection has been held does
not preclude a party from introducing other evidence
JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS are those so made in the on the same issue.
pleadings filed or in the progress of a trial.
Whether an ocular inspection is to be made or not
EXTRAJUDICIAL ADMISSIONS are those made out lies in the discretion of the trial court.
of court, or in a judicial proceeding other than the one
under consideration An ocular inspection conducted by a judge
without notice to or presence of the parties is
Extrajudicial admissions or other admissions are, as invalid as an ocular inspection is a part of the
a rule and where elements of estoppel are not trial.
present, disputable.
THE COURT MAY REFUSE THE INTRODUCTION
A judicial admission may be oral as a verbal waiver of OF OBJECT EVIDENCE AND RELY ON
proof made in open court, a withdrawal of a TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE ALONE IF:
contention or a disclosure made before the court, or 1. the exhibition of such object is contrary to
an admission made by a witness in the course of his morals or decency
testimony or deposition, or may be in writing as in 2. to require its being viewed in court or in an
pleading, bill of particulars, stipulation of facts, ocular inspection would result in delays,
request for admission, or a judicial admission inconvenience, unnecessary expenses out of
contained in an affidavit used in the case. proportion to the evidentiary value of such
object
To be considered a judicial admission, the admission 3. such object evidence would be confusing or
must be made in the same case, otherwise, it is an misleading, as when the purpose is to prove
extrajudicial admission. the former condition of the object and there is
no preliminary showing that there has been
When a defendant is declared in default for having no substantial change in said condition
failed to answer the complaint, such a failure does 4. the testimonial or documentary evidence
not amount to an admission of the facts alleged in the already presented clearly portrays the object
complaint. in question as to render a view thereof
unnecessary.
Stipulations voluntarily entered into between the
parties will be respected and enforced by the courts Even if the object is repulsive or indecent, if a view of
unless contrary to public policy or good morals. the same is necessary in the interest of justice, such
However, the binding effect of the facts applies only evidence may still be exhibited but the court may
to the parties in agreement. exclude the public from such view.
Pleadings superseded or amended disappear from Object evidence includes any article or object which
the record of judicial admissions, and in order that may be known or perceived by the use of any of the
any statements contained therein may be considered senses.
as an extrajudicial admission, it should be offered Example: examination of the anatomy of a
formally in evidence. person or of any substance taken therefrom, or
the examination of the representative portrayals
of the object in question, such as maps, diagrams
or sketches, pictures or audio-visual recordings,
RULE 130and a
QuickTime™ provided the same are properly authenticated.
RULESareON ADMISSIBILITY
needed to see this picture.
Just like ocular inspection, which are only auxiliary
Section 1. Object as evidence remedies afforded to the court, such observations of
the court may be amplified by interpretations afforded
Where an object is relevant to a fact in issue, the by testimonial evidence, especially by experts.
court may acquire knowledge thereof by actually
viewing the object, in which case such object NOTE: Documents are object evidence if the purpose
becomes object evidence or by receiving testimonial is to prove their existence or condition, or the nature
evidence thereon. of the handwriting thereon, or to determine the age of
Page 244 of 289

the paper used, or the blemishes or alterations first recognized as being relevant to the case, must
thereon, as where falsification is alleged. Otherwise, explain what he did with it.
they are considered documentary evidence if the
purpose is to establish the contents or tenor thereof. In order that photographs may be given as evidence,
it must be shown that it is the true and faithful
Object evidence may consist of articles or persons, representation of the place or object which to which
which may be exhibited inside or outside the they refer. Photographs may be verified by the
courtroom; it may also be a mere inspection of an photographer or any person acquainted with the
object or an experiment. object represented and testify that the same faithfully
represents the object.
OBJECT EVIDENCE - is a tangible object that
played some actual role on the matter that gave rise For tape recordings, the ff. must be shown:
to the litigation. For instance, a knife. 1. the recording device was capable of
recording testimony
DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE - is a tangible 2. the operator of the device was competent
evidence that merely illustrates a matter of 3. establishment of the correctness or
importance in the litigation such as maps, diagrams, authenticity of the recording
models, summaries and other materials created 4. deletions, additions, changes have not been
especially for litigation. made
5. manner of the preservation of the recording
The DISTINCTION between object and 6. identification of the speakers
demonstrative evidence is important because it 7. Testimony elicited was voluntarily made.
helps determine the standards that the evidence
must meet to be admissible. For OBJECT Authenticated fingerprints may be compared to
EVIDENCE, the required foundation relates to fingerprints found on the crime scene.
proving that the evidence is indeed the object used in
the underlying event. The foundation for 2 theories on whether the court may compel the
DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE, does not involve plaintiff to submit his body for inspection in
showing that the object was the one used in the personal injury cases:
underlying event, but the foundation generally 1. No, because the right of a person to be
involves the showing that the demonstrative object secured of the possession or control of his
fairly represents or illustrates what it is alleged to person is sacred.
illustrate. 2. Yes, because if it is not allowed then the
court will be an instrument of the grossest
¾ Physical evidence is the highest form of injustice and therefore the object for which
evidence. courts are instituted would be defeated since
the courts will be compelled to give a one-
REQUISITES FOR THE ADMISSIBILITY OF THE sided decision.
OBJECT EVIDENCE:
1. Must be relevant to the fact in issue. Weight of authority favors the first 2nd theory
Example: In murder case, the prosecution The accused may be compelled to submit himself to
offered in evidence a gun. The gun must an inspection of his body for the purpose of
have some connection to the crime. There ascertaining identity or for other purpose.
must be a logical nexus between the
evidence and the point on which it is offered. There cannot be any compulsion as to the accused
QuickTime™ and a taking dictation from the prosecuting officer for the
2. Object must be toauthenticated
are needed see this picture. before it is purpose of determining his participation in the offense
admitted. Authentication usually consists of charged.
showing that the object was involved in
underlying event. Whenever the defendant, at the trial of his case,
testifying in his own behalf, denies that a certain
The “chain of custody” method of authentication writing or signature is in his own hand he may on
requires that every link in the chain of custody – cross-examination be compelled to write in open
every person who possessed the object since it was court in order that the jury may be able to compare
his handwriting with the one in question.
Page 245 of 289

NOTE: Best evidence rule applies only when the

Where the object in question cannot be produced in purpose of the proof is to establish the terms of
court because it is immovable or inconvenient to writing.
remove, it is proper for the tribunal to go to the object
in its place and there observe it. For the application of the best evidence, it is
essential that: the original writing or if it is a private
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE document, be first duly identified, and a sufficient and
a sufficient foundation be laid, so as to entitle the
Section 2. Documentary evidence writing to be admitted in evidence, and it must be
available to the opposite party for cross-examination
DOCUMENT – any substance having any matter
expressed or described upon it by marks capable of Section 4. Original document.
being read.
WHAT IS AN ORIGINAL DOCUMENT?
NOTE: If it is produced without regard to the (a) the original of a document is one in two the
message which it contains, it is treated as real contents of which are the subject of inquiry.
evidence. (b) When a document is in two or more copies,
executed at or about the same time, with
1. Best Evidence Rule identical contents, all such copies are equally
regarded as originals
Section 3. Original document must be produced; (c) When an entry is repeated in the regular
exceptions course, of business, one being copied from
another at or near the time of the transaction,
GENERAL RULE: The original document must be all entries are likewise equally regarded as
produced. originals.
EXCEPTIONS: Document - is a deed, instrument or other duly

1. When the original has been lost or destroyed, authorized appear by which something is proved,
or cannot be produced in court, without bad evidenced or set forth.
faith on the part of the offeror;
2. When the original is in the custody or under Documentary evidence is that which is furnished by
the control of the party against whom the written instruments, inscriptions and documents of all
evidence is offered, and the latter fails to kinds.
produce it after reasonable notice;
3. When the original consists of numerous RULE OF EXCLUSION: that which is secondary
accounts or other documents which cannot evidence cannot inceptively be introduced as the
be examined in court without great loss of original writing itself must be produced in court,
time and the fact sought to be established except in the four instances mentioned in Section 3.
from them is only the general result of the
whole; and The non-production of the original document unless
4. When the original is a public record in the justified in Section 3, gives rise to the presumption of
custody of a public officer or is recorded in a suppression of evidence.
public office
In the case of real evidence, secondary evidence of
BEST EVIDENCE RULE - is that rule which requires the fact in issue may readily be introduced without
the highest grade of evidence obtainable to prove a having to account for the non-production of such
disputed fact. QuickTime™ and a primary evidence.
are needed to see this picture.
Purpose of the rule requiring the production of With respect to documentary evidence, the best
the best evidence: is the prevention of fraud evidence rule applies only when the content of such
because if the best evidence is not presented then document is the subject of inquiry.
the presumption of suppression of evidence will be
present. If carbon copies are signed, they are considered as
originals.
Page 246 of 289

In criminal cases, where the issue is not only with The due execution can be proved through the
respect to the contents of the document but also as testimony of either:
to whether such document actually existed, the 1) the person who executed it
original itself must be presented. 2) The person before whom its execution was
acknowledged
Affidavits and depositions are considered as not 3) any person who was present and saw it
being the best evidence, hence not admissible if the executed and delivered or who thereafter
affiants or deponents are available as witness. saw it and recognized the signatures, or one
to whom the parties thereto had previously
If the issue is the contents of the telegram as confessed the execution thereof
received by the addressee, then the original dispatch
received is the best evidence; and on the issue as to Intentional destruction of the originals by a party who,
the telegram sent by the sender, the original is the however, had acted in good faith does not preclude
message delivered for transmission. If the issue is his introduction of secondary evidence of the
the inaccuracy of transmission, both telegrams as contents thereof.
sent and received are originals.
When the original is outside the jurisdiction of the
GENERAL RULE: An objection by the party against court, as when it is in a foreign country, secondary
whom secondary evidence is sought to be introduced evidence is admissible.
is essential to bring the best evidence rule into
application. Where secondary evidence has been Secondary evidence may consist of (IN THE
admitted, the rule of evidence might have been SAME ORDER):
successfully invoked if proper and timely objection 1. a copy of said document
had been taken. 2. recital of its contents in an authentic
document
When a duplicate or a copy is amended or altered by 3. the recollection of the witnesses
the party, it becomes the original.
Where the law specifically provides for the class and
Blueprints and vellum tracings have been held to be quantum of secondary evidence to establish the
originals rather than copies. contents of a document, such requirement is
controlling.
Photocopies are not originals since they are
reproduced at a latter time. It is not necessary to prove the loss beyond all
possibility of mistake. A reasonable probability of its
When an entry is repeated in the regular course of loss is sufficient, and this may be shown by bona fide
business, one being copied from another at or near and diligent search for it in place where it is likely to
the time of the transaction, all the entries are be found.
regarded as originals.
Where both parties admit that an instrument has
2. Secondary Evidence been lost, it is sufficient to warrant the reception of
secondary evidence.
Section 5. When original document is unavailable
The fact of loss or destruction must, like any other
SECONDARY EVIDENCE – shows that better or fact, be proved by a fair preponderance of evidence,
primary evidence exists as to the proof of fact in and this is sufficient.
question. It is deemed less reliable.
QuickTime™ and a The fact that a writing is really a true copy of the
What must be areproved topicture.
needed to see this admit secondary original may be shown by the testimony of a person
evidence? who has had the opportunity to compare the copy
(a) The execution of the original with the original and found it to be correct. In order
(b) loss, destruction or unavailability of all such that the testimony of such person may be admissible,
originals it is sufficient that the original was read to him by
(c) Reasonable diligence and good faith in the another person while he read the copy and found that
search for or attempt to produce the original. it corresponded with what was read to him. It is also
sufficient where the person who made the original a
Page 247 of 289

short time thereafter made a copy by writing down The justified refusal or failure of the adverse party to
the dictation of another reading from the original. produce the document does not give rise to the
presumption of suppression of evidence or create an
As long as the originals of a public document in the unfavorable inference against him. It authorizes the
possession of the parties have been proven lost, a introduction of secondary evidence.
certified copy of the document made before it was
lost is admissible as secondary evidence of its Under this rule, the production of the original
contents, and the burden of proof is upon the party document is procured by mere notice to adverse
questioning its authenticity to show that it is not a true party and the requirements for such notice must be
copy of the original. complied with as a condition precedent for the
subsequent introduction of secondary evidence by
In proving the contents of the original in some the proponent.
authentic document, it is sufficient if it appears in a
private document which is proved to be authentic. Where the nature of the action is in itself a notice, as
“Authentic” means that the document should be where it is for the recovery or annulment of
genuine. It need not be a public document. documents wrongfully obtained or withheld by the
other party, no notice to produce said document is
It is not expected of a witness to state the contents of required.
a document with verbal accuracy, it is enough that
the substance of the documents be stated. Section 7. Evidence admissible when original
documents is a public record
Section 6. When original document is in adverse
party’s custody or control Such document may be evidenced by an official
publication thereof or by a copy attested by the
FACTS WHICH MUST BE SHOWN BY THE PARTY officer having the legal custody of the record, and
OFFERING SECONDARY EVIDENCE: in case of an authorized public record of a private
1) The adverse party’s custody or control of the writing, the same may also be proved by a copy
original document. thereof attested by the legal keeper of the record.
2) That reasonable notice was given to the
adverse party who has the custody or control Section 8. Party who calls for document not
of the document bound to offer it.
3) Satisfactory proof of its existence
4) Failure or refusal by the adverse party to Production of papers or documents upon the trial,
produce it in court. pursuant to a notice duly served, does not make such
papers or documents evidence. It is not until the party
No particular form of notice is required, as long as it who demanded the production of the papers examine
fairly apprises the other party as to what papers are them and offers them in evidence that they assume
desired. the status of evidentiary matter.
Even an oral demand in open court for production at

a reasonable time thereafter will suffice. 3. Parol Evidence Rule
Notice must be given to the adverse party, or his Section 9. Evidence of written agreements
attorney, even if the document is in the actual
possession of a third party. GENERAL RULE: When the terms of an agreement
have been reduced to writing, it is to be considered
Where receipt of the original
QuickTime™ and a of a letter is as containing all the terms agreed upon and there
acknowledged on aarecarbon copy
needed to see thereof, there is no
this picture. can be, between the parties and their successors in
need for a notice to the other party to produce the interest, no evidence of such terms other than the
original of the latter. contents of the written agreement.
It should be observed that the duplicate copy, if EXCEPTION: aparty may present evidence to
complete, is itself an original copy and the only point modify, explain or add to the terms of the written
in issue is the receipt of the basic original copy agreement if he puts in issue in his pleading any of
thereof. the following:
Page 248 of 289

(a) An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or PAROL EVIDENCE BEST EVIDENCE

imperfection in the written agreement; RULE RULE
(b) The failure of the written agreement to It presupposes that the Contemplates the
express the true intent and agreement of the original document is situation wherein the
parties thereto; available in court original writing is not
(c) The validity of the written agreement; or available and/or there
(d) The existence of other terms agreed to by is a dispute as to
the parties or their successors in interest whether said writing is
after the execution of the written agreement. the original.
Prohibits the varying of Prohibits the
The term “agreement” includes wills. the terms of a written introduction of
agreement substitutionary
The parol evidence rule is based upon the evidence in lieu of the
consideration that when the parties have reduced original document
their agreement on a particular matter into writing, all regardless of whether
their previous and contemporaneous agreements on or not it varies the
the matter are merged therein, hence evidence of a contents of the original
prior or contemporaneous verbal agreement is With the exception of Applies to all kinds of
generally not admissible to vary, contradict, or defeat the wills, the parol writings
the operation of a valid document. evidence rule applies
only to documents
PAROL EVIDENCE – any evidence aliunde, whether which are contractual
oral or written, which is intended or tends to vary or in nature
contradict a complete and enforceable agreement Can be invoked only It can be invoked by
embodied in a document. when the controversy any party to an action
is between the parties regardless of whether
Formerly, even if there was a written agreement on a to the written or not such party has
particular subject matter, the parol evidence rule agreement, their participated in the
did not apply to or bar evidence of a collateral privies, or any party writing involved.
agreement between the same parties on the same directly affected
or related subject matter, in the ff instances: thereby (this is to
1) Where the collateral agreement is not prevent fraudulent
inconsistent with the terms of the written operation of the
contract instrument upon the
2) Where the collateral agreement has not rights of strangers)
been integrated in and is independent of the
written contract as where it is suppletory to In order that the parol evidence may be admissible,
the original contract the mistake or imperfection of the document, or its
3) where the collateral agreement is failure to express the true intent and agreement of
subsequent to or novatory of the written the parties, or the validity of the agreement must be
contract; and put in issue by the pleadings. Where the plaintiff
4) Where the collateral agreement constitutes a failed to allege any such fact in his complaint, he
condition precedent which determines cannot introduce parol evidence thereon.
whether the written contract may become
operative or effective, but this exception shall If the defendant invoked such fact in his answer,
not apply to a condition subsequent not parol evidence may be introduced as such fact is now
stated in the agreement.
QuickTime™ and a put in issue.
Parol evidence rule does not apply, and may not Even if such defenses were not raised in the
properly be invoked by either party to the litigation pleadings, but the parol evidence is not objected to,
against the other, where at least one party to the such objection is deemed waived. Such mistake or
suit is not a party or privy to the written imperfection must be proved by clear and convincing
instrument in question and does not base a claim evidence.
or assert a right originating in the instrument or
the relation established thereby. When no timely objection or protest is made to the
admission of parol evidence in respect to a contract
Page 249 of 289

relative to real estate and when the motion to strike admissible to clarify the ambiguity provided that the
out said evidence came too late; and if the other matter is put in issue by the pleader. Example:
party against whom such evidence was presented Dollars, tons and ounces
cross-examined the witnesses who testified in
respect to the contract, said party will be understood NOTE: False description does not vitiate a document
to have waived the benefits of the law. Parol if the subject is sufficiently identified. The incorrect
evidence under those facts is competent and description shall be rejected as surplusage while the
admissible. correct and complete description standing alone shall
sustain the validity of the writing.
An intrinsic ambiguity in the written agreement is now
required to be put in issue in the pleading in order No express trust concerning an immovable or any
that parol evidence therein may be admitted. interest therein may be proved by parol evidence.
The “mistake” under the first exception refers to a Rules governing the admissibility of parol
mistake of fact which is mutual to the parties where evidence to explain ambiguity
the innocent party was imposed upon by unfair 1) Where the instrument itself seem to be clear
dealing of the other. and certain on its face, and the ambiguity
arises from extrinsic or collateral matter, the
“Imperfection” includes an inaccurate statement in ambiguity may be helped by parole evidence
the agreement, or incompleteness in the writing, or (Latent ambiguity)
the presence of inconsistent provisions therein. As a
matter of substantive law, when one party was 2) Where the ambiguity consists in the use of
mistaken and the other knew that the instrument did equivocal words designing the person or
not state their real agreement but concealed the fact subject-matter, parole evidence of collateral
from the former, the instrument may be reformed. or extrinsic matter may be introduced for the
purpose of aiding the court in arriving at the
The purpose of the second exception is to enable meaning of the language used (Intermediate
the court to ascertain the true intention of the parties ambiguity)
or the true nature of the transaction between the
parties. 3) Where the ambiguity is such that a perusal of
the instrument shows plainly that something
As earlier stated, it now includes a latent or intrinsic more must be added before the reader can
ambiguity in the writing. There is latent ambiguity determine what of several things is meant,
when the writing on its face appears clear and the rule is inflexible that parol evidence
unambiguous but there are collateral matters or cannot be admitted to supply the deficiency.
circumstances which make the meaning uncertain, or
where a writing admits of two constructions both of To justify the reformation of a written instrument
which are in harmony with the language used. upon the ground of mistake, the concurrence of
three things is necessary:
Example of latent ambiguity is when the documents
refers to a particular person but such name pertains 1. Mistake should be of fact – does not
to many persons with same name. correctly express the intention of the parties
applies only to a mistake of facts
PATENT OR EXTRINSIC AMBIGUITY - is such
ambiguity which is apparent on the face of the writing 2. Mistake should be mutual or common to
itself and requires something to be added in order to both parties to the instrument –
ascertain the meaning QuickTime™
of the andwords a used. In this Reformation is then given because mistake is
case, parol evidence is not
are needed admissible,
to see this picture. otherwise the mutual. The parties must have come to an
court would be creating a contract between the actual oral agreement before they have
parties. attempted to reduce it in writing,
INTERMEDIATE AMBIGUITY – situation where an 3. The mistake should be alleged and

ambiguity partakes of the nature of both patent and proved by clear and convincing evidence
latent. In this, the words are seemingly clear and with
a settled meaning, is actually equivocal and admits of When the operation of the contract is made to
two interpretations. Here, parol evidence is depend upon the occurrence of an event, which for
Page 250 of 289

that reason is a condition precedent, such may be In the construction of an instrument where there are
established parol evidence. This is not varying the several provisions or particulars such a construction
terms of the written contract by extrinsic agreement is, if possible, to be adopted as will give effect to all.
for the simple reason that there is no contract in
existence; there is nothing to which to apply the Section 12. Interpretation according to intention;
excluding rule. general and particular provisions
Due execution of a writing may proved by parol In the construction of an instrument, the intention of
evidence because what the rule prohibits is varying the parties is to be pursued and when a general and
the terms of the writing by parol evidence. a particular provisions are inconsistent, the latter is
paramount to the former. So a particular intent will
To determine whether or not the subject of an control a general one that is inconsistent with it.
oral agreement is separate and distinct from the
subject of a writing: it is essential to ascertain first Section 13. Interpretation according to
what is the whole subject intended by the parties to circumstances
be covered by such writing. This question may be
determined from the contract itself, in the light of the For the proper construction of an instrument, the
subject matter with which it deals and of the circumstances under which it was made, including
circumstances standing its execution. The next step the situation of the object thereof and of the parties to
is to ascertain the subject of the oral agreement it, may be shown, so that the judge may be placed in
offered to be proved. Then a comparison should be the position of those whose language he is to
made between the writing and the oral negotiation interpret.
and from that comparison it may be seen whether or
not the subject of the writing is separate and distinct Section 14. Peculiar signification of terms
from that of the oral negotiation. Parol evidence is
admitted if the subject of the oral negotiation is not so The terms of a writing are presumed to have been
closely connected with the subject of the writing. used in their primary and general acceptation, but
evidence is admissible to show that they have been a
The prohibition does NOT apply when the intent is to local, technical, or otherwise peculiar signification,
show that there is no meeting of the minds or there is and were so used and understood in the particular
no perfected contract. instance, in which case the agreement must be
construed accordingly
This rule has no application to conditions or
stipulations which are antecedent to the existence of Section 15. Written words control printed
the contract and on the faith of which the supposed
contract is executed. When an instrument consists partly of written words
and partly of a printed form, and the two are
Where the provisions of a written contract are inconsistent, the former controls the latter.
ambiguous and there is sufficient evidence showing
the existence of other agreements collateral thereto, Section 16. Experts and interpreters to be used in
parol evidence is admissible to prove the real explaining certain writings
agreement of the parties.
When the characters in which an instrument is written
are difficult to be deciphered, or the language is not
4. Interpretation of Documents understood by the court, the evidence of persons
skilled in deciphering the characters, or who
Section 10. Interpretation of and
QuickTime™ a awriting according understand the language, is admissible to declare the
to its legal meaningare needed to see this picture. characters or the meaning of the language.
The language of a writing is to be interpreted Section 17. Of two constructions, which preferred
according to the legal meaning it bears in the place of
the execution unless the parties intended otherwise. When the terms of an agreement have been intended
in a different sense by the different parties to it, that
Section 11. Instrument construed so as to give sense is to prevail against either party in which he
effect to all provisions supposed the other understood it, and when different
constructions of a provision are otherwise equally
Page 251 of 289

proper, that it is to be taken which is the most asked to testify to those matters as to which he is
favorable to the party in whose favor the provision incapacitated.
was made.
The testimony of the interested witness, while
Section 18. Construction in favor of natural right rightfully subjected to careful scrutiny, should not be
rejected on the ground of bias alone.
When an instrument is equally susceptible of two
interpretations, one in favor of natural rights and the NOTE: The interest of the witness affects only his
other against it, the former is to be adopted. credibility but not his competency.
Section 19. Interpretation according to usage When an attorney is a witness to his client, except as
to merely formal matters, such as the attestation or
An instrument may be construed according to usage, custody of an instrument and the like, he should
in order to determine its true character. leave the trial of the case to other counsel. Except
when essential to the ends of justice, a lawyer should
The laws in force at the time the contract was made avoid testifying in court in behalf of his client.
must govern its interpretation and application.
It is objectionable for a judge to be a witness on the
The clear terms of the contract should not be subject same trial. However, the trial judge is competent
to interpretations. when his testimony concerns merely formal or
preliminary matters about which there is no dispute,
as where he testifies in a perjury prosecution that the
QUALIFICATION OF WITNESSES defendant gave testimony before him in another
proceeding in another court.
C. Testimonial Evidence
Persons who have been convicted of perjury is
Section 20. Witness; their qualifications – cannot be discharged as a witness for the
government when he is a co-accused in a criminal
WITNESS – reference to a person who testifies in a case. The same goes for witnesses to a will.
case or gives evidence before a judicial tribunal
Upon the timely objection to the incompetency of a
COMPETENCY OF A WITNESS – is the legal fitness witness being raised, it is the duty of the court to
or ability of a witness to be heard on the trial of a make such examination as will satisfy him as to the
cause. competency or incompetency of the witness to testify
in the case, and thereupon, to rule on the objection
GENERAL RULE: When a witness takes the stand to accordingly.
testify, the law, on grounds of public policy, presumes
that he is competent. The court cannot reject the NOTE: The failure to object to the competency of a
witness if there is not proof of his incompetency. witness is tantamount to a waiver and once the
evidence is admitted the same shall stay in the
The burden is upon the party objecting to the records and be judge according to its merits; the
competency of a witness to establish the grounds of judge has no right to discard it solely for the reason
incompetency. that it could have been excluded had it been objected
to.
It is the judge who has the decision as to the
competency of the witness. Acts of a party entitled to object that can be
QuickTime™ and a considered as waiver of an objection:
NOTE: The objection to the
are needed competency
to see this picture. of a witness 1) where the party fails to raise the objection
must be made before he has given any testimony if a when the witness testifies, though at that
party knows before the trial that the witness is time the party knows of his incompetency;
incompetent, and if the incompetency appears on the 2) where one party who might have made the
trial, the objection must be interpreted as soon as it objection calls the witness in support of his
becomes apparent. own case.
NOTE: When the incompetency of a witness is only Section 21. Disqualification by reason of mental
partial, the objection need not be raised until he is incapacity or immaturity
Page 252 of 289

Drunkenness does not per se disqualify a witness

THE FOLLOWING CANNOT BE WITNESSES: from testifying. The point of inquiry is the moment of
1) Those whose mental conditions, at the time examination.
of their production for examination, is such
that they are incapable of intelligently making A witness is not rendered incompetent by the fact
known their perception to others; that he was under the influence of a drug at the time
2) Children whose mental maturity is such as to of the occurrence as to which he testifies, or at the
render them incapable of perceiving the facts time of giving his testimony.
respecting which they are examined and
relating to them truthfully. Deaf-mutes are competent witnesses when:
1. they can understand and appreciate the
The qualifications and disqualifications of witnesses sanctity of an oath;
are determined as of the time the said witnesses are 2. can comprehend facts they are going to
produced for examination in court or at the taking of testify to; and
their depositions. 3. can communicate their ideas through a
qualified interpreter.
With respect to children of tender years, their
competence at the time of the occurrence to be In the case of a child witness, the court in
testified to should be taken into account, especially if determining his competency must consider his
such event took place long before their production as capacity:
witnesses. (a) at the time the fact to be testified to occurred
such that he could received correct
UNSOUND MIND - any mental aberration, whether impressions thereof
organic or functional, or induced by drugs or (b) to comprehend the obligation of an oath and
hypnosis. (c) to relate those facts truly at the time he is
offered as a witness. The court should take
Unsoundness of mind does not per se render a into account his capacity for observation,
witness incompetent, one may be medically insane recollection and communication.
but in law capable of giving competent testimony.
A child who witnessed the crime when he was 11
GENERAL RULE: Lunatic or a person affected with years old and testified thereto when he was already
insanity is admissible as a witness if he has sufficient 15, is a competent witness.
understanding to apprehend the obligation of an oath
and is capable of giving a correct account of the The intelligence of the child is the test of his
matters which he has seen or heard with respect to competency and not his age.
the questions at issue.
The court, not the judge as an individual, is to be
EXCEPTION: If the witness is a lawful inmate of an satisfied of the competency of the child
asylum for the insane, he will not be presumed to be
competent and before he can testify his competency Section 22. Disqualification by reason of marriage
should be made to appear by the party offering him.
This is because the insanity is presumed to continue This is called the “spousal immunity”. This is
as a mental state, if it has once existed, until the different from marital privilege.
contrary is shown.
Basis
Idiots are incompetent witnesses. They may be The rule forbidding one spouse to testify for or
classed as insane persons. Anandidiot,
QuickTime™ a being one who against the other is based on principles which are
has no understanding
are needed toof his
see this nativity, the law
picture. deemed important to preserve the marriage relation
presumes that he will never attain any. as one of full confidence and affection, and that this
is regarded as more important to the public welfare
However, it is not prudent to admit the interpretation than that the exigencies of the lawsuits should
of a teacher if he cannot understand properly the authorize domestic peace to be disregarded for the
signs given by the deaf-mute who was not even his sake of ferreting out facts within the knowledge of
student. strangers.
When Rule Applicable
Page 253 of 289

The rule applies to any form of testimony; therefore it to have waived his objection to the latter’s testimony
protects against using the spouse-witness’s in rebuttal.
admission or against compelling him to produce
documents. In a prosecution of the husband for the rape of their
daughter, the wife is not disqualified to testify for the
In order that this will apply, it is necessary that the prosecution since the crime may be considered as
marriage is valid and existing as of the time of the having been committed against the wife and the
offer of testimony and that the other spouse is a conjugal harmony sought to be protected by this rule
party to the action. no loner exists.
The privilege to object to testimony concerning anti- The exception to the marital disqualification rule was
marital facts may be claimed only when the applied where the wife was the complainant in a case
spouse for or against whom the testimony of the against her husband for falsification of her signature
other is offered as a party to the case. in a deed of sale involving their conjugal property.
After the death or the divorce of one spouse, the Where the wife is a co-defendant in a suit charging
privilege ceases, for the reason ceases. her and her husband with collusive fraud, she cannot
be called as an adverse party witness as this will
The prosecuting attorney has no right to call a wife as violate the disqualification rule.
a witness or to attempt to draw from her statements
that the accused had married her for the purpose of Section 23. Disqualification by reason of death or
suppressing her testimony. insanity of adverse party
The wife is competent to testify for the other This section is called THE SURVIVORSHIP
defendant if the case against his husband as a party DISQUALIFICATION RULE OR DEAD MAN
was dismissed. STATUTE.
No unfavorable inference may be drawn from the fact It constitutes only a partial disqualification as the
that a party spouse invokes the privilege to prevent witness is not completely disqualified but is only
the witness-spouse from testifying against him or her prohibited from testifying on the matters therein
specified, unlike the marital disqualification rule which
EXCEPTION TO THE RULE: is complete and absolute disqualification.
1. that the case in which the husband or the
wife is called to testify is a civil case instituted NOTE: This applies to both civil and criminal cases
by one against the other
2. it is a criminal case for a crime committed by REQUISITES FOR THE APPLICATION OF THIS
one against the other. RULE:
1. the witness offered for examination is a
Reason for the Exception party plaintiff, or the assignor of said
The reason for the exception is that the identity of the party, or a person in whose behalf a case
interest of person disappears and the consequent is prosecuted.
danger of perjury based on that identity is non- - Such plaintiff must be the real party in
existent. And in such a situation, the security and interest. This disqualification does not apply
confidence of private life which the law aims at where a counterclaim has been interposed
protecting will be nothing but ideals which, through by the defendant as the plaintiff would
their absence, merely leave a void in the unhappy thereby be testifying in his defense. The
home. QuickTime™ and a same is true where the deceased contracted
are needed to see this picture. with the plaintiff through an agent and said
This can be waived just like any other objection agent is alive and can testify, but the
to the competency of other witnesses. Can be testimony of the plaintiff should be limited to
waived through failure to interpose timely objection or acts performed by the agent.
by calling the other spouse as a witness - The term “assignor” of a party means
assignor of a cause of action which has
Where the accused husband in his testimony imputed arisen, and not the assignor of a right
the commission of the crime to his wife, he is deemed assigned before any cause of action has
arisen
Page 254 of 289

- A witness may testify against an estate, between the witness and the decedent, even
provided he is not a party, or an assignor of a though without the presence or participation
party, or a person in whose behalf the suit is of the latter.
instituted. Interest in the outcome of the suit, - Negative testimony, that the fact did not
per se, seemingly, does not disqualify a occur during the life time of the deceased, is
witness from testifying not covered by the prohibition.
- Testimony on the present possession by the
2. the case is against the executor or witness of a written instrument signed by the
administrator or other representative of a deceased is also not covered by the
person deceased or of unsound mind prohibition, as such fact exists even after the
- The term “representative of a deceased decedent’s demise.
person” has been interpreted to include not - the parties plaintiff to an action is not
only the executor or administrator of a rendered incompetent to testify to fraudulent
deceased person, but also the person who transactions of the deceased, as the rule is
has succeeded to the right of the deceased, not designed to shield wrongdoers. But
whether by purchase or descent or operation before admitting the testimony of parties
of law. plaintiff in this kind of action, the court should
- It is necessary that the said defendant is compel such parties to clearly establish the
being sued and defends in such alleged fraudulent acts.
representative capacity and not in his
individual capacity. Even if the properties In land registration case instituted by the decedent’s
have been judicially adjudicated to the heirs, representatives, this prohibition does not apply as the
they are still protected under this rule against oppositors are considered defendants and may
such prohibited testimony as they are therefore, testify against the petitioner. This
considered as the representatives of the prohibition does not also apply in cadastral cases
deceased. since there is no plaintiff or defendants therein.
- The rule applies regardless of whether the
deceased died before or alter the suit against Since the purpose of this rule is to discourage perjury
him is filed provided he is already dead at and protect the estate from fictitious claims, the
the time the testimony is sought to be given prohibition does not apply even if all the 4 requisites
above are present, where the testimony is offered to
3. the case is upon a claim or demand prove a claim less than what is established under a
against the estate of such person who is written document or is intended to prove a fraudulent
deceased or of unsound mind transaction of the deceased, provided such fraud is
- The rule does not apply where it is first established by evidence aliunde.
administrator who brings an action to recover
property allegedly belonging to the estate or Purpose
the action is by the heirs of a deceased This is designed to close the lips of the party as
plaintiff who were substituted for the latter. plaintiff when the death has closed the lips of the
- This is restricted to debts or demands party defendant. If the purpose of the oral testimony
enforceable by personal actions upon which is to prove a lesser claim than what might be
money judgments can be rendered. warranted by clear evidence, to avoid prejudice to the
- An action for damages for breach of estate of the deceased, the law has certainly no
agreement to devise property for services reason for its application.
rendered is a claim against an estate; hence
the plaintiff is not a competent witness. When Deemed Waived
- Estate of a deceased QuickTime™ andperson
a includes all The disqualification under this rule is waived if the
properties, arereal
neededand personal,
to see this picture. belonging to defendant does not timely object to the admission of
the deceased person. such evidence or testifies on the prohibited matters or
cross-examines thereon.
4. The testimony to be given is on matter of
fact occurring before the death, of such If the case is brought against the partnership of the
deceased person or before such person deceased, the witness is still credible because the
became of unsound mind. testimony is not against the deceased nor his estate.
- This includes any matter of fact which bears
upon a transaction or communication
Page 255 of 289

Section 24. Disqualification by reason of and may be waived by said persons in the same
privileged communication manner, either expressly or impliedly.
THE FOLLOWING PERSONS CANNOT TESTIFY Marital Privilege

AS TO MATTERS LEARNED IN CONFIDENCE IN
THE FF CASES: REQUISITES FOR MARITAL PRIVILEGE TO
APPLY:
1. The husband or the wife, during or after the 1) there was a valid marital relation
marriage, cannot be examined without the 2) the privilege is invoked with respect to a
consent of the other as to any confidential communication between the
communication received in confidence by spouses during said marriage
one from the other during the marriage 3) the spouse against whom such evidence is
except in a civil case by one against the being offered has not given his or her to such
other, or in a criminal case for a crime testimony
committed by one against the other or the
latter’s direct descendants or ascendants NOTE: The privilege cannot be claimed with respect
to communications made prior to the marriage of the
2. An attorney cannot, without the consent of spouse
his client, be examined as to any
communication made by the client to him, or The privilege on principle applies to any form of
his advice given thereon in the course of, or confident disclosure. Usually this will be a
with a view to, professional employment, nor communication in words but it may also include
can an attorney’s secretary, stenographer, or conduct.
clerk be examined, without the consent of the
client and his employer, concerning any fact Marital communications are presumed to be
the knowledge of which has been acquired in confidential but the presumption may be overcome by
such capacity. proof that they were not intended to be private.
3. A person authorized to practice medicine, Since the confidential nature of the communication is
surgery or obstetrics cannot in a civil case, the basis of the privilege, the same cannot be
without the consent of the patient, be invoked where it was not intended to be kept in
examined as to any evidence or treatment confidence by the spouse who received the
given by him or any information which he same, as in the case of a dying declaration of the
may have acquired in attending such patient husband to his wife as to who was his assailant,
in a professional capacity, which information which communications was obviously intended to be
was necessary to enable him to act in that reported to the authorities.
capacity, and which would blacken the
reputation of the patient. The privilege is lost if the communication is
overheard or comes into the hands of a third
4. A minister or priest cannot, without the party, whether legally or not, by reason of the fact
consent of the patient, be examined as to that while the spouse is covered by the prohibition,
any advice or treatment given by him or any such third party is not and, consequently, can testify
information which he may have acquired in thereon. It is necessary, however, that there was no
attending such patient in a professional collusion with or voluntary disclosure by either
capacity, which information was necessary to spouse to the third person, otherwise the latter
enable him to act in that capacity, and which becomes an agent of the spouse and would thereby
would blacken the reputation
QuickTime™ and a of the patient. be covered by the prohibition.
5. A public officer cannot be examined during EXCEPTIONS TO MARITAL PRIVILEGE:
his term of office or afterwards, as to 1. that the case in which the husband or the
communications made to him in official wife is called to be examined is not a civil
confidence, when the court finds that the case instituted by one against the other
public interest would suffer by the disclosure. 2. that it is not a criminal case for a crime
committed by one against the other
Objections under the disqualification rules can be
invoked only by the persons protected thereunder DISQUALIFICATION MARITAL PRIVILEGE
Page 256 of 289

BY REASON OF creating that relationship, they will not be covered by

MARRIAGE the privilege even if thereafter the lawyer becomes
Can be invoked only if Can be claimed whether the counsel of the party in a case involving said
one of the spouses is a or not the spouse is a statements
party to the action, party to the action.
Applies only if the Can be claimed even The test is whether the communications are made to
marriage is existing at after the marriage has an attorney with a view of obtaining professional
the time the testimony is been dissolved assistance or advice.
offered
Constitutes a total Applies only to Communications to an attorney are not privileged
prohibition against the confidential where they are voluntary made after he has refused
spouse of the witness communications to accept employment.
between the spouse
There is NO privilege communication in cases where
The privilege in principle, belongs to the abstract legal opinions are sought and obtained on
communicating spouse not to the other one. general questions of law, either civil or criminal, in
such cases, no facts are or need be disclosed
Even if the communication between the spouse who implicating the client, and so there is nothing of a
is a party to the action can still prevent the other confidential character to conceal.
spouse from testifying against him under the marital
disqualification rule The communications covered by the privilege include
verbal statements and documents or papers
Even if the spouse who is a party to the action does entrusted to the attorney, and of facts learned by the
not object to the other testifying therein, thus waiving attorney through the act or agency of his client.
the marital disqualification, he can still prevent the
disclosure by said spouse-witness of confidential Confidential relations made in reliance upon the
communications covered by the privilege. supposed relation of attorney and client, whether the
party assuming to act as such is an attorney or not,
Conspiracy between spouses to commit a crime is are excluded by the court.
not covered by the privilege since it is not the
intention of the law to protect the commission of a Sidewalk advice from attorney upon legal question for
crime. which no compensation is asked or expected and
none given except a luncheon, should not be
This does not apply when spouses are living regarded as privileged communications
separately and there is an active hostility. But if there
is a chance to reconcile, then this privilege will apply. NOTE: The privilege is applicable to counsel de
oficio.
Attorney-Client Privilege
Even in cases where the consent of the client is
REQUISITES: obtained, it is his duty to ask first to be relieved and
1) there is an attorney and client relation have another attorney take his place before testifying
2) The privilege is invoked with respect to a so that he may be cross-examined and not leave his
confidential communication between them in client without proper representation.
the course of professional employment
3) The client has not given his consent to the An attorney who becomes a subscribing witness to
attorney’s testimony. his client’s will, may testify to the attending
QuickTime™ and a circumstances of the execution of his client’s will for
Basis: public policyare needed to see this picture. by requesting his attorney to become a subscribing
witness to the will, the testator waives privilege as to
The client owns the privilege and therefore he alone his attorney’s testimony concerning testamentary
can invoke it. communications.
For the privilege to apply, the attorney must have Communication made by a client to an attorney as a
been consulted in his professional capacity, even public officer to enable him to act in his capacity is
if no fee has been paid therefore. However, if the not privilege.
communications were not made for the purpose of
Page 257 of 289

The privilege DOES NOT apply when the action was 3) The information, advice or treatment, if
brought by the client against the attorney. revealed, would blacken the reputation of the
patient
THE PRIVILEGE DOES NOT APPLY TO 4) the privilege is invoked in a civil case,
COMMUNICATIONS WHICH ARE: whether patient is a party or not
1. intended to be made public
2. intended to be communicated to others It is not necessary that the physician-patient
3. intended for an unlawful purpose relationship was created through the voluntary act of
4. received from third person not acting in the patient. For example the treatment may have
behalf or as agent of the client been given at the behest of another, the patient being
5. made in the presence of third parties who are in extremis
strangers to the attorney-client relationship
The privilege extends to all forms of communications
The period to be considered is that date when the as well as to the professional observations and
privileged communication was made by the client to examinations of the patient
the attorney in relation to either a crime committed in
the past or with respect to a crime intended to be THE PRIVILEGE DOES NOT APPLY WHERE:
committed in the future 1) the communication was not given in
confidence
Professional communications continues even after 2) the communication is irrelevant to the
the relation of client and attorney is terminated professional employment
3) the communication was made for an unlawful
Communications regarding a crime already purpose, as when it is intended for the
committed made by the offender to an attorney, commission or concealment of a crime
consulted as such, are privileged communications 4) the information was intended to be made
public
Contemplated criminal acts are not covered. 5) there was a waiver of the privilege either by
provisions of contract or law
The privilege DOES NOT attach when the attorney is
a conspirator. The rule does not apply to mere causal
information stated by the witness because such
The privilege DOES NOT apply when all the attorney information is not necessary for the treatment of the
has to do it to either affirm or deny the secret patient.
revealed by the client to the court.
If the physician confined himself merely to the
ascertainment of the nature and character of the
Physician-Patient Privilege injury for the purpose of reporting them to the
defendant, physician may testify.
Purpose
This privilege is intended to facilitate and make safe, The burden of proving that such relation does not
full and confidential disclosure by patient to exist is upon the person objecting it.
physician of all facts, circumstances, and symptoms,
untrammeled by apprehension of their subsequent Death of the patient does not extinguish the relation.
and enforced disclosure and publication on the
witness stand, to the end that the physician may form Under Rule 28 of the Rules of Court, the results of
a correct opinion, and be enabled safely and the physical and mental examination of a person,
efficaciously to treat his QuickTime™
patient. and a when ordered by the court, are intended to be made
are needed to see this picture. public, hence they can be divulged in that proceeding
REQUISITES: and cannot be objected to on the ground of privilege
1) the physician is authorized to practice
medicine, surgery, or obstetrics Result of autopsies or post mortem examinations are
2) the information was acquired or the advice or generally intended to be divulged in court, aside from
treatment was given by him in his the fact the doctor’s services were not for purposes of
professional capacity for the purpose of medical treatment
treating and curing the patient.
Page 258 of 289

An example of a waiver of the privilege by provision court or body regarding any matter taken up at the
of law is found in Section 4 of said Rule 28 under conciliation proceedings conducted by them.
which if the party examined obtains a report on said
examination or takes the deposition of the examiner, ¾ Voters are cannot be compelled to reveal
he thereby waives any privilege regarding any other their bets
examination of said physical or mental condition
conducted or to be conducted on him by any other ¾ Trade Secrets will be covered by this
physician. privilege
Waiver of the privilege by contract may be found in ¾ Prosecutor is not to be compelled to dispose
stipulations in life insurance policies. the identity of the informer unless the informer is
already known to the accused and when the identity
The disqualification due to privilege communications of the informer is vital.
between ministers or priests and penitents require
that the same were made pursuant to a religious duty GENERAL RULE: Bank deposits may not be
enjoined in the course of discipline of the sect or disclosed
denomination to which they belong and must be
confidential and penitential in character. Example: EXCEPTION:
under seal of the confessional 1. authorized by depositor
2. Impeachment under the Constitution
3. Upon order of the court in case of bribery or
Privileged communications to Public Officers deriliction of duty
4. When the subject matter is the deposits
REQUISITES: 5. Anti-graft cases
1) that it was made to the public officer in official
confidence
2) that public interest would suffer by the 2. Testimonial Privilege
disclosure of such communication, as in the
case of State secrets. Section 25. Parental and filial Privilege
Where no public interest will be prejudiced, this rule This section is an expanded amendment of the
will not apply. former provision found in Section 20 (e), a
disqualification by reason of relationship which, in
PUBLIC INTEREST – something in which the turn, was reproduced from Art. 315 of the Civil Code.
community at large has some pecuniary interest by
which their legal rights or liabilities are affected. It was not correctly a rule of disqualification, as the
descendant was not incompetent or disqualified to
testify against his ascendants, but was actually a
Other instances of Privilege privilege to testify, hence it was referred to as “filial
privilege”.
¾ Under RA 53 as amended by RA 1477, the
publisher, editor or duly accredited reporter of any However, under the Family Code, the descendant
newspaper, magazine or periodical of general may be compelled to testify against his parents and
circulation cannot be compelled to reveal the source grandparents, if such testimony is indispensable in
of any news report or information appearing in said prosecuting a crime against the descendant by one
publication which was related in confidence to him parent against the other (Art. 215).
unless the court or QuickTime™
a House and a or committee of
Congress finds thataresuch
needed torevelation
see this picture. is demanded by Under the present formulation, both parental and filial
the Security of the State. privileges are granted to any person, which privileges
against compulsory testimony he can invoke in any
¾ Art. 233 of the Labor Code provides that all case against any of his parents, direct ascendants,
information and statements made at conciliation children or direct descendants.
proceedings shall be treated as privileged
communications and shall not be used as evidence in Reason for the Rule
the National Labor Relations Commission, and The reason for the rule is to preserve “family
conciliators and similar officials shall not testify in any cohesion” deploring the lack of this provision under
Page 259 of 289

former laws as doing violence to the most sacred The immediate flight of the accused and prolong stay
sentiments between members of the same family.” in other country is the implied consciousness of guilt.
NOTE: The privilege may now be invoked in both civil NOTE: Failure to answer a letter does not give rise to
and criminal cases. an implied admission as to the truth of the statements
contained therein, since there is no duty upon the
addressee to reply. However, where the good faith
3. Admissions and Confessions requires that the addressee state his position frankly
so that the addressee be not misled, acquiescence
Section 26. Admission of a party may be inferred from non-denial.
ADMISSION - any statement of fact made by a party Failure to return or object to a bill or statement sent
against his interest or unfavorable to the conclusion by the debtor, within a reasonable time, is competent
for which he contends or is inconsistent with the facts evidence (but rebuttable) that the account is correct.
alleged by him. Undue delay in the enforcement of a right is strongly
persuasive of a lack of merit in the claim, since it is
It is a voluntary acknowledgment in express terms or human nature for a person to assert his rights most
by implication, by a party interest or by another by strongly when they are threatened or invaded.
whose statement he is legally bound, against his
interest, of the existence or truth of a fact in dispute Delay in instituting a criminal prosecution unless
material to the issue (Francisco). satisfactorily explained, creates suspicion about the
motive of the supposed offended party and gives rise
EXPRESS ADMISSIONS are those made in definite, to reasonable doubt of the guilt of the defendant.
certain and unequivocal language.
Implied admission is cannot be inferred from an act of
Example: Action for personal injuries caused by a repairing a defect which caused on injury. This is
collision between P’s carriage and D’s automobile. D founded on sound reason and good policy. A person
was not in the automobile when the accident may have exercised all the care which the law
occurred. D’s son was driving the automobile, having required and yet, in the light of his new experience,
taken it without express permission from D. Before after an unexpected accident has occurred, and as a
trial D told P’s husband that he had bought the measure of extreme caution, he may adopt additional
automobile for the pleasure of his family and for safeguards.
business; that members of the family might take it
without asking; and that so far as the liability Admission and Confession Distinguished
extended (D) was responsible. On the bases of this ADMISSION CONFESSION
express admission, verdict was rendered for P. An admission is a It involves an
Likewise, defendant duly executes and signs a statement of fact which acknowledgment of
document before a notary public stating therein that does not involve an guilt or liability
his wife is the true and absolute owner of the lands acknowledgement of
which are the subject matter of the litigation. Said guilt or liability
document is an express admission that defendant is It may be express or Must be express
not the owner of the land, and admissible against tacit
him. May be made by third Can be made only by
persons the party himself and
IMPLIED ADMISSIONS are those which may be in some instance, are
inferred from the acts, declarations or omission of a admissible against his
party. Therefore, an admission
QuickTime™ and maya be implied from co-accused
conduct, statement are
ofneeded
silence of picture.
to see this a party.
The rule that the act, declaration or omission of a
Examples: The payment of interest of a debt is an party may be given in evidence against him is based
implied admission of the existence of the debt. upon the presumption that no man could declare
anything against himself, unless such
The repair made by the landlord is the implied declarations were true.
admission that it is not the duty of the tenant to
repair. It is a rule that a “statement is not competent as an
admission where it does not, under a reasonable
Page 260 of 289

construction, appear to admit or acknowledge the would be necessary for P’s counsel to ask D if he had
fact which is sought to be proved by it.” written such a letter, before introducing it in rebuttal
as D’s admission for the purpose of discrediting D’s
REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY OF testimony.
ADMISSIONS:
1. They must involve matters of fact and not of Admissions may be verbal or written, express or tacit,
law; judicial or extrajudicial.
2. They must be categorical and definite;
3. They must be knowingly and voluntarily JUDICIAL ADMISSION
made; It is one made in connection with a judicial
4. They must be adverse to the admitter’s proceeding in which it is offered, while an
interests, otherwise it would be self-serving extrajudicial admission is any other admission.
and inadmissible.
NOTE: Section 26 and 32 of this Rule refer to
An admission may be introduced in evidence in extrajudicial admissions.
two ways:
1. independent evidence Testimony of the accused in a particular case to the
2. impeaching evidence effect that he was married to the victim is an
admission against his penal interest and sustain his
Independent evidence – admissions are original conviction even in the absence of independent
evidence and no foundation is necessary for their evidence to prove such marriage
introduction in evidence
Admission v. Declaration Against Interest
If the admission was made orally, it may be proved ADMISSION DECLARATION
by any competent witness who heard them or by the AGAINST INTEREST
declarant himself. The law does not require An admission need to The declaration against
impossibilities. If the witness states the substance of be, although, of course, interest must have been
the conversation or declaration, the admission of his it will greatly enhance made against the
testimony is not erroneous. its probative weight if it proprietary or pecuniary
be so made interest of the parties
Impeaching evidence –a proper foundation must be Made by a party Must have been made by
laid for the impeaching questions, by calling attention himself, and is a person who is either
of such party to his former statement so as to give primary evidence and deceased or unable to
him an opportunity to explain before such admissions competent though he testify
are offered in evidence. be present in court and
ready to testify
Example to illustrate the rules regarding the Admission can be made The declaration against
introduction of admissions in evidence either as any time interest must have been
an independent or as impeaching evidence: made ante litem motam
P sues D for a balance due and unpaid for
groceries furnished. The claim is for P175 due on SELF SERVING DECLARATION is one which has
July 31. D disputes the amount due, and offers a been made extrajudicially by the party to favor his
statement of account sent by P in September reading interests. It is not admissible in evidence
“Balance due – P75”. This is admissible and may be
presented as part of the evidence in chief of D. The vital objection to the admission of this kind of
Action was brought by broker P for evidence is its hearsay character. To permit
commissions on stock shares QuickTime™bought
and a and sold for D. introduction would open the door to frauds and
All the transactions arehad been
needed made
to see this picture.through D’s office perjuries.
manager. P claims the interest at 8% was understood
to be charged monthly on balances. The manager Reasons for the inadmissibility of self-serving
testifies that the interest was to be 5%. However, declarations:
there is a letter of D to P dated June 1, containing the 1. the inherent untrustworthiness of the
sentence “as usual this year, I expect to pay 8% declarations
interest on monthly balances. I D had taken the stand 2. the fact that to permit their introduction would
as a witness and had testified in corroboration of his open the door to fraud and fabrication of
manager’s statements as to the understanding, it testimony.
Page 261 of 289

3. the fact that if testified to by one other than 5) when they are offered without objection, the
the declarant, they would be hearsay. evidence cannot afterward be objected to as
incompetent.
Self serving testimony refers to extrajudicial
statement of a party which is being urged for Diaries, as a general rule, are inadmissible because
admission in court. It does not include his testimony they are self-serving in nature, UNLESS they have
as a witness in court. It has no application to a court the nature of books of account; but it has been held
declaration. Where the statement was not made in that an entry in diary, being in the nature of a
anticipation of a future litigation, the same cannot be declaration, if it was against interest when made, is
considered self-serving. admissible.
The mere fact of death alone does not render An invoice prepared by a merchant in the city
competent self-serving conduct, admissions or covering merchandise consigned to his agent in the
declarations of the deceased person during his life- province, and a letter of said merchant requesting
time. confirmation of the receipt of said merchandise by the
agent, are not self-serving if they had been prepared
Unsworn declarations by others for the declarant not in anticipation of litigation in which they were
would be inadmissible. presented as evidence. Carbon copies of letters of
demands sent to defendant, receipt of which was
Persons whose unsworn declarations in behalf of acknowledged.
a party are not admissible in favor of the latter:
1) agents, as regards their principals Flight from justice is an admission by conduct and
2) a co-defendant or co-partner, as regards the circumstantial evidence of consciousness guilt.
other
3) a guardian as regards his word. Evidence of attempts to suppress evidence, as by
4) a principal as regards his surety destruction of documentary evidence are admissible
5) a husband or wife as regards his or her under the same rationale.
spouse
6) an employee, as regards his employer The act of reporting a machine, bridge, or other
7) officers of the corporation facility after an injury has been sustained therein is
8) public officers as regards public corporation not an implied admission of negligence by conduct. It
9) predecessors in title, as regards am owner of is merely a measure of extreme caution by adopting
property additional safeguards since, despite due care and
diligence, an unexpected accident can still occur.
Self serving declarations made by a party are
admissible in his own behalf in the ff: Section 27. Offer of compromise not admissible
1) when they form part of res gestae, including
spontaneous statements and verbal acts. COMPROMISE - is an agreement made between two
2) when they are in the form of complaint and or more parties as a settlement matters in dispute.
exclamations of pain and suffering.
3) when they are part of a confession offered by Civil cases - an offer of compromise is not an
the prosecution, that his testimony is a recent admission of any liability, and is not admissible in
fabrication, in which case his prior evidence against the offeror.
declaration, even of a self serving character,
may be admitted, provided they were made Criminal cases - except those involving quasi-
at a time when a motive to misrepresent did offenses (criminal negligence) or those allowed by
not exist. QuickTime™ and a law to be compromised, an offer of compromise by
4) where theyareare offered
needed to see this by the argument. The
picture. the accused may be received in evidence as an
objections which have been pointed out do implied admission of guilt.
not apply against the reception of the
statements of one party as evidence when A compromise agreement is valid when the true
such statements are offered by his essence of which resides in reciprocal concessions.
adversary. Every written statements of a
party in his own favor can be successfully GENERAL RULE
turned when such statements are offered
against him.
Page 262 of 289

An offer of compromise is not an admission of any under consciousness of guilt but merely to avoid the
liability and is not admissible in evidence against an risks of criminal action against him.
offeror.
GENERAL RULE: No compromise may be entered
EXCEPTIONS: into as regards the penal action.
1. an express admission of liability made during
negotiations for a compromise; EXCEPTION: Compromise may be entered into with
2. Express and unqualified admission of respect to the civil liability.
indebtedness accompanying an offer of
compromise; In criminal cases where compromise is allowed by
3. An admission of the correctness of an law as in opium or usury cases, no implied admission
account or of specific items; of guilt arises against the accused who makes an
4. admission involving interest in property; offer to compromise.
5. admission affecting liability for a tort.
In prosecution for violation of the internal revenue
It is the policy of the law to favor the settlement of law, such offers of compromise are not admissible in
disputes, to foster compromise, and to promote evidence as the law provides that the payment of any
peace. If every offer to buy peace could be used as internal revenue tax may be compromised, and all
evidence against him who presents it, many criminal violations may likewise be compromised,
settlements would be prevented, and unnecessary except those already filed in court and those involving
litigation would be produced and prolonged. fraud.
While a bare offer to compromise does not constitute Actual marriage, in rape case, criminal liability is
an admission on the part of the person making it, the extinguished. An offer to compromise a monetary
fact that a writing contains an offer of compromise consideration and not to marry the victim, is an
does not render it inadmissible in evidence if it is implied admission of guilt. The attempt of the parents
competent evidence for other purposes. of the accused to settle the case with the complainant
was considered an implied admission of guilt. The SC
If a statement forming part of an offer of compromise has held that an offer of marriage by the accused,
or made in the course of negotiations to effect a during the investigation of the rape case is also
settlement is an admission of fact pertinent to an admission of guilt.
issue between the parties, it is admissible on the trial
of such issue, unless it is so closely connected with NOTE: What matters is the fact of marriage and not
the offer of compromise as to be inseparable the intent behind the marriage. Example, it does not
therefrom, is a tentative or hypothetical statement as matter whether the accused married the victim for the
distinguished from a definite statement of fact or is reason of exculpating him from criminal liability.
expressly made without prejudice or indicates that it
is made in confidence that a compromise will be The amendment regarding the admissibility of a plea
affected. of guilty later withdrawn or an unaccepted offer to
plead guilty to a lesser offense is a consequence of
An express admission of liability made during the present provisions in criminal procedure on plea
negotiations for a compromise has been held bargaining. One of the practical reasons advanced is
admissible. that encouragement of negotiations between the
defense and prosecution counsel with respect to
A pedestrian is run over by a driver, he was injured. pleas requires flexibility in making and withdrawing
Later on the driver approached the pedestrian and them without prejudice.
said sorry because heQuickTime™ was drunk and a that night and
offered a payment. are The pedestrian
needed to see this picture.may not introduce The court allows the accused to change plea when
the fact that he was offered a money to show that the previous plea was made improvidently.
driver is liable. However, he can introduce the fact
that the driver was drunk. Criminal cases involving criminal negligence, or the
quasi-offenses contemplated in Art. 365 of the RPC,
In criminal cases, an offer of compromise is an are allowed to be compromised under the
implied admission of guilt, although the accused may amendment to this section, hence, an offer of
be permitted to prove that such offer was not made settlement is not an implied admission of guilt.
Page 263 of 289

An offer to pay or the actual payment of the medical, Section 29. Admission by co-partner or agent
hospital or other expenses by reason of the victim’s
injuries is not admissible to prove civil or criminal The admission of one partner is received against
liability therefore. Such humanitarian acts or another on the ground that they are identified in
charitable responses should be encouraged and interest , and that each is agent for the other and that
rewarded, instead of being discouraged or penalized the acts or declarations of one during the existence of
by being considered as admissions of liability. the partnership, while transacting its business and
within the scope of the business, are evidence
A troublesome question arises when an express against the others.
admission of liability is coupled with an offer of
assistance. Some courts have stated that both should REQUISITES:
be admitted since the express admission insured that 1. That the partnership, agency, or joint interest
the offer or tender of assistance was “not merely an is established by evidence other than the act
act of benevolence, but some admission of fault”. If or declaration – partnership relation must be
the admission can be disclosed without mentioning shown
the furnishing, offering or promise to pay medical 2. the act or declaration is within the scope of
expenses, then it should be admitted. the partnership, agency or joint interest – the
fact that each has individually made a
Section 28. Admissibility by third party substantially similar admission does not
render the aggregate admission competent
Unless he assents thereto, a party to an action against the firm, this is with regard to a non-
cannot be affected by the admission of a person partnership affair.
who does not occupy toward him any relation of 3. Such act or declaration must have been
privity, agency or joint interest. made during the existence of the partnership,
agency or joint interest.
The act, declaration or omission of another is
generally irrelevant, and that in justice a person The declaration of one partner, not made in the
should not be bound by the acts of mere presence of his co-partner, are not competent to
unauthorized strangers. prove the existence of a partnership between
them as against such other partner. The existence
The rule is well-settled that a party is not bound of a partnership is cannot be established by general
by any agreement of which he has no knowledge reputation, humor or hearsay.
and to which he has not given his consent and
that his rights cannot be prejudiced by the Even where one partner is shown to be hostile to
declaration, act or omission of another, except by another, the admissions of such first partner may be
virtue of a particular relation between them. received, although, of course, such hostility may
affect the question of weight of the evidence. The
This section refers to the first branch of the rule of declarations of a deceased partner, relating to the
“RES INTER ALIOS ACTA ALTERI NOCERE NON partnership business, are admissible against his
DEBET”. It is corollary known as the second branch survivors.
of the rule, is found in Section 34 of Rule 130.
Declarations or admissions made by a partner after
EXCEPTIONS TO THIS RULE: the dissolution of the partnership are not competent
1. those instances where the third person is a against the other partners in the absence of prior
partner, agent, joint owner, joint debtor or authority or subsequent ratification, even though such
has a joint interest with the party (Section declarations relate to matters pending at the time of
29); QuickTime™ and a dissolution.
2. or is a con-conspirator
are needed to see this(Section
picture. 30) ;
3. or a privy of the party (Section 31). With respect to the relevant substantive provisions on
these matters, refer to the Civil Code provisions on
Basis of the Exceptions partners, agents, co-owners and solidary debtors
A third party may be so united in interest with the
party-opponent that the other person’s admissions NOTE: As a rule, statements made after a
may be receivable against the party himself. The partnership has been dissolved do not fall within this
term “privy” is the orthodox catchword for the relation. exception, but where the admissions are made in
connection with the winding up of the partnership
Page 264 of 289

affairs, said admissions are still admissible as the interest, not the size of the fractional part, which
partner is acting as an agent of his co-partners in governs. If he is liable to the plaintiff in the same
said winding up. manner that his co-defendants are liable, the extent
to which they are bound by his admission cannot be
What is done by an agent is done by the principal measured or graduated by the quantity of his interest
through him, as through a mere instrument. in the contract.
The admission or declaration of an agent subsequent Section 30. Admission by conspirator

to a transaction in controversy, or after this agency
has terminated are not binding upon, or evidence Under the Revised Penal Code, a conspiracy exists
against his principal. But when the admission or when two or more persons come to an agreement
declaration is made at the time of the transaction, or concerning the commission of a felony and decide to
during his employment, when it pertains to the matter commit it.
in hand, as agent, which is within the cope of his
employment, his admissions and declarations are How Conspiracies are Proved
competent, though not conclusive against his Conspiracies are generally proved by a number of
principal. indefinite acts, conditions, and circumstances which
vary according to the purposes to be accomplished. If
When a party to any proceeding expressly refers to it be proved that the defendants pursued by their acts
any other person for an answer on a particular the same object, one performing one part and
subject in dispute, such answer, if restricted to the another performing part of the same, so as to
subject matter in relation to which the reference is complete it, with a view to the attainment of the same
made, is in general, evidence against said party, for object, one will be justified in the conclusion that they
the reason that he makes such third person his were engaged in the conspiracy to effect that object.
accredited agent for the purpose of giving such
answer. NOTE: This rule applies only to extrajudicial acts or
statements and not to testimony given on the witness
The admissions of a third person are receivable in stand at the trial where the party adversely affected
evidence against the party who has expressly thereby has the opportunity to cross-examine the
referred another to him for information in regard to an declarant. Hence, the requirement that the
uncertain or disputed matter. conspiracy must preliminary be proved by evidence
other than the conspirator’s admission applies only to
But such a reference does not make the person extrajudicial, but not to judicial, admissions.
referred to an agent for the purpose of making
general admissions, the declarations are not REQUISITES:
evidence unless strictly within the subject matter in 1. such conspiracy is shown by evidence
relation to which reference is made. aliunde – conspiracy must be established by
prima facie proof in the judgment of the court.
When the reference was not made to any particular 2. the admission was made during the
person but in general, the rule above-stated is not existence of the conspiracy –after, the
applicable. termination of a conspiracy, the statements
of one conspirator may not be accepted as
Admissions by counsel are admissible against the evidence against any of the other
client as the former acts in representation and as an conspirators.
agent of the client, subject to the limitation that the 3. the admission related to the conspiracy itself-
same should not amount to a compromise or should relate to the common object
confession of judgment QuickTime™ and a
are needed to see this picture. ¾ These are not required in admissions during
The phrase “joint debtor” does not refer to mere the trial as the co-accused can cross-examine the
community of interest but should be understood declarant and besides these are admissions after the
according to its meaning in the common law system conspiracy has ended.
from which the provision was taken, that is, in
solidum, and not mancomunada. Direct proof is not essential to prove conspiracy.
The quantum of interest of the declarant does not

affect the application of the rule. It is the fact of joint
Page 265 of 289

The conspiracy may be inferred from the acts of the

accused or from the confessions of the accused or by In order that the extrajudicial statements of a co-
prima facie proof thereof. accused may be taken into consideration in judging
the testimony of a witness, it is necessary that the
The concurrence of minds essential to conspiracy statements are made by several accused, the same
may be inferred where the parties are apparently are in all material respects identical, and there could
pursuing the same object whether acting separately have been no collusion among said co-accused in
or together by common or different means leading to making such statements.
the same lawful result, and a common purpose is
inferable from concerted action converging to a If this testimony is introduced to prove the truth of B’s
definite objective and whether or not the parties statement, it will be hearsay, but it will fall within the
meet, or confer and formulate their plans. co-conspirator exception to hearsay rule. This is
because the statement was:
Conspiracy must be shown to exist as clearly and 1. made by a co-conspirator
convincingly as the commission of the offense itself. 2. made during the course of the conspiracy
3. made in furtherance of the objectives of the
A person charged with conspiracy is presumed to be conspiracy
innocent, and the burden is on the prosecution to
establish his guilt. Section 31. Admission by privies
The rule of evidence with regard to conspiracy is PRIVITY - mutual succession of relationship to the
founded on the principle which apply to agencies and same rights of property.
partnerships, the association should be bound by the
acts of one of its members in carrying out the design. PRIVIES - those who have mutual or successive
relationship to the same right of property or subject
Where there is no independent evidence of the matter, such as “personal representatives, heirs,
alleged conspiracy, the extrajudicial confession of an devisees, legatees, assigns, voluntary grantee or
accused cannot be used against his co-accused as judgment creditors or purchasers from them without
the res inter alios rule applies to both extrajudicial notices to the fact.
confessions and admissions.
REQUISITES:
GENERAL RULE: Extra judicial admissions made by 1. there must be a relation of privity between
a conspirator after the conspiracy has terminated and the party and the declarant
even before trial are also not admissible against the 2. The admission was made by the declarant,
co-conspirator as predecessor in interest, while holding the
title to the property.
EXCEPTIONS: 3. The admission is in relation to said property.
1. made in the presence of the latter who
expressly or impliedly agreed therein, as The privity in estate may have arisen by succession
there would be a tacit admission under by acts mortis cause or by acts inter vivos.
Section 32
2. Where the facts stated in said admission are Basis
confirmed in the individual extrajudicial It is an established rule in evidence that the
confessions made by the co-conspirators declaration of a person under whom the title is
after their apprehension (interlocking claimed are receivable against the successor so
confessions) claiming, on the theory that there is sufficient identity
3. as a circumstance to determine
QuickTime™ and a the credibility of interest to render the statements of the former
of a witnessare needed to see this picture. equally receivable with the admissions of the present
4. as circumstantial evidence to show the owner, and that the rights of the latter are those of
probability of the latter’s participation in the the former.
offense.
¾ The principle on which such evidence is
If made after the act designed is fully accomplished received is that the declarant was so situated that he
and after the object of the conspiracy has been either probably knew the truth, and his interest were such
attained of finally defeated, the declaration will be that he would not have made the admissions to the
admissible only against the person who made it. prejudice of his title or possession, unless they were
Page 266 of 289

true. The regard which one so situated would have to Voluntary participation in a reenactment of the crime
his interest is considered sufficient security against conducted by the police is considered a tacit
falsehood. admission of complicity.
In order to render an admission of a former owner of However, for a reenactment to be given any
property competent against his successor in title, it evidentiary weight, the validity and efficacy of the
must have been made at a time when the title was in confession must first be shown. The implication of
the declarant. guilt is not derived from mere silence but from
appellant’s silent acquiescence in participating in the
GENERAL RULE: Declarations of the transferor, reenactment of the crime.
made subsequent to the transfer, are inadmissible
The rule DOES NOT apply if the statements adverse
EXCEPTIONS: to the party were made in the course of an official
1. Where the declarations are made in the investigation, as where he was pointed out in the
presence of the transferee and he course of a custodial investigation and was neither
acquiesces in the statements or asserts no asked to reply nor comment on such imputations or
rights where he ought to speak; where the party had a justifiable reason to remain
2. Where there has been a prima facie case of silent, as where he was acting on advice of counsel,
fraud established as where the thing granted otherwise his right to silence would be illusory.
has a corpus, and the possession of the thing
after the sale or transfer, remains with the No admission can be implied from silence where the
seller or transferor; failure to answer was caused by constraint, or the
3. Where the evidence establishes a continuing party was not aware at the time that he had an
conspiracy to defraud, which conspiracy interest, or believed that he had no interest, or was
exists between the vendor and the vendee. only indirectly affected, or where as the matter was
presented, he had no interest to object, for example,
Section 32. Admission by silence where the statement was not addressed to him or
was in his favor.
The rule that the silence of the party against whom a
claim or a right is asserted may be construed as an The same absence of relevancy occurs where an
admission of the truth of the assertion rests on that answer would be unseemly interruption of orderly
instinct of our nature, which leads us to resist an proceedings then in progress, such as the delivery of
unfounded demand. a sermon, the taking of the deposition or of testimony
in open court or the discharge by a judge, magistrate,
When Applicable counsel, or other person of his proper function in
This rule applies in both criminal as well as in civil court proceedings.
cases.
A person under investigation for the commission of
REQUISITES: an offense has the right to remain silent and to be
1. He must have heard or observed the act or informed of that right.
declaration of the other person;
2. He must have had the opportunity to deny it The rule applies to adverse statements in writing if
3. He must have understood the statement; the party was carrying on a mutual correspondence
4. He must have an interest to object, such that with the declarant. However, if there was no such
he would naturally have done so, as if the mutual correspondence, the rule is relaxed on the
statement was not true; theory that while the party would have immediately
5. The facts are within his and
QuickTime™ knowledge;
a reacted by a denial of the statement were orally
6. The fact admitted
are needed to seeor the inference to be
this picture. made in his presence, such prompt response can
drawn from his silence is material to the generally not be expected if the party still has to
issue. resort to a written reply.
The rule on admission by silence applies where a Section 33. Confession

person was surprised in the act or even if he is
already in the custody of the police. CONFESSION - categorical acknowledgement of
guilt made by an accused in a criminal case, without
any exculpatory statement or explanation. If the
Page 267 of 289

accused admits having committed the act in question initials and which corrected facts are best
but alleges a justification therefore, the same is known to the accused.
merely an admission. • The accused is sufficiently educated and
aware of the consequences of his act.
There can also be a confession of judgment in a civil • It was made in the presence of impartial
case where the party expressly admits his liability. witnesses with the accused acting normally
on that occasion
Confession may either be oral or in writing and if in • There is lack of motive on the part of the
writing, it need not be under oath. investigators to extract a confession, with
improbabilities and inconsistencies in the
The fact that the extrajudicial confession was made attempt of the accused to repudiate his
while the accused was under arrest does not render it confession.
inadmissible where the same was made and • The accused questioned the voluntariness of
admitted prior to the 1973 Constitution. the confession only for the first time at the
trial of the case.
A confession may either be judicial or extrajudicial. • The contents of the confession were affirmed
by the accused in his voluntary participation
JUDICIAL CONFESSION - one made before a court in the reenactment of the crime, as shown by
in which the case is pending and in the course of his silent acquiescence thereto.
legal proceedings therein and, by itself, can sustain a • The facts contained in the confession were
conviction even in capital offenses. confirmed by other subsequent facts
• After his confession, the accused was
EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION - one made in any subjected to physical examination and there
other place or occasion and cannot sustain a were no signs of maltreatment or the
conviction unless corroborated by evidence of the accused never complained thereof, but not
corpus delicti. This section refers to extrajudicial where he failed to complain to the judge on a
confessions. reasonable apprehension of further
maltreatment as he was still in the custody of
REQUISITES: his torturers
1. The confession must involve an express and
categorical acknowledgment of guilt. If the extrajudicial confession was obtained before
2. The facts admitted must be constitutive of a the effectivity of the 1973 Constitution on January 17,
criminal offense 1973, the same is admissible in evidence even if the
3. The confession must have been given confessant was not informed of his right to silence
voluntarily and to counsel as this constitutional mandate should
4. the confession must have been intelligently be given a prospective, and not a retrospective
made, the accused realizing the importance effective and this doctrine applies even if the
or legal significance of this act. confession was made while the accused was under
5. There must have been no violation of Section arrest.
12, Art. III of the 1987 Constitution.
Under the current rule, the confession is inadmissible
Confessions are presumed to be voluntary and the if there is a violation of the accused’s right to counsel
onus is on the defense to prove that it was and to silence.
involuntary for having been obtained by violence,
intimidation, threat or promise of reward or leniency. Where, before the statement containing the
extrajudicial confession of guilt was taken, the
The following circumstances QuickTime™ andhave a been held to accused was asked whether he was familiar with the
be indicia of the voluntariness of a confession:
are needed to see this picture. provisions of then Section 20, Art. IV of the 1973
• The confession contains details which the Constitution and he answered in the affirmative, and
police could not have supplied or invented. the statement which he signed states that he had
• The confession contains details which could been apprised of his constitutional rights with the
have been known only to the accused warning that anything he would say might be used for
• The confession contains statements which or against him in court, such extrajudicial confession
are exculpatory in nature is admissible in evidence, especially where he
• The confession contains corrections made by thereafter failed to impugn the same by not taking the
the accused in his handwriting or with his witness stand although assisted by counsel.
Page 268 of 289

Where the verbal extrajudicial confession was made The entire confession should be admitted in evidence
without counsel, but it was spontaneously made by but the court may, in appreciating the same, reject
the accused immediately after the assault, the same such portions as are incredible.
is admissible not under the confession rule but as
part of the res gestae, aside from the consideration Where the extrajudicial confession was obtained by
that no custodial investigation was involved. maltreatment, the judgment based solely thereon is
null and void and the accused may obtain his release
Where the accused was merely told of his on a writ of habeas corpus.
constitutional rights and asked if he understood what
he was told, but he was never asked whether he GENERAL RULE: The extrajudicial confession of an
wanted to exercise or avail himself of such rights, his accused is binding only upon himself and is not
extrajudicial confession is inadmissible. admissible against his co-accused
Where the extrajudicial confession of the accused EXCEPTIONS:

while under custodial investigation was merely 1. if the latter impliedly acquiesced in or
prefaced by the investigator with a statement of his adopted said confession by not questioning
constitutional rights, to which he answered that he its truthfulness, as where it was made in his
was going to tell the truth, the same is inadmissible presence and he did not remonstrate against
as his answer does not constitute a waiver of his right his being implicated therein
to counsel and he was not assisted by one when he 2. If the accused persons voluntarily and
signed the confession. His short answer does not independently executed identical confessions
show that he knew the legal significance of what without conclusion, commonly known as
were asked of him, especially where the accused is interlocking confessions which confessions
illiterate and it was not shown how his constitutional are corroborated by other evidence and
rights were explained by the investigator. without contradiction by the co-accused who
was present.
The waiver of the right to counsel during custodial 3. If the accused persons voluntarily and
investigation must be made with the assistance of independently executed identical confessions
counsel. Counsel must be independent and without conclusion, commonly known as
competent. interlocking confessions, which confessions
are corroborated by other evidence, and
Where a confession was illegally obtained from two without contradiction but the co-accused who
of the accused and, consequently, are not admissible was present.
against them, with much more reason should the 4. Where the accused admitted the facts stated
same be inadmissible against third accused who had by the confessant after being apprised of
no participation therein. such confession
5. If they are charged as co-conspirators of the
Any form of coercion, whether physical, mental or crime which was confessed by one of the
emotional, renders the extrajudicial confession accused and said confession is used only as
inadmissible. a corroborating evidence.
6. If they are charged as co-conspirators of the
A promise of immunity or leniency vitiates a crime which was confessed by one of the
confession if given by the offended party or by the accused and said confession is used only as
fiscal, but not if given by a person whom the accused a corroborating evidence.
could not have reasonably expected to be able to 7. Where the confession is used as
comply with such promise, such
QuickTime™ and a as an investigator circumstantial evidence to show the
who is not a prosecuting
are needed to see or could not bind the
this picture. probability of participation by the co-
offended party which was a corporation conspirator.
8. where the confessant testified for his co-
Where the accused voluntarily made a second defendant or
extrajudicial confession after he had been maltreated 9. where the co-conspirator’s extra judicial
in order to extort the first confession, such second confession is corroborated by other evidence
confession is admissible only if it can be proved that of record.
he was already relieved of the fear generated by the
previous maltreatment.
Page 269 of 289

This section, as now amended, declares as prove that the accused committed another crime
admissible the confession of the accused not only wholly independent of that for which he is on trial.
with respect to the offense charged but also any
offense necessarily included therein. On the other Previous acts of negligence, that is, selling barium
hand, the 1987 Constitution specifically provides that, chlorate instead of potassium chlorate, is admissible
illegal confessions and admissions are inadmissible to show knowledge or intent.
against the confessant or the admitter, hence they
are admissible against the persons who violated the In civil cases the rule as to proof of commission of an
constitutional prohibition against obtaining illegal act by showing the commission of similar acts by the
confessions or admissions. same person at other times and under other
circumstances is the same as in a criminal
Section 34. Similar acts as evidence prosecution.
GENERAL RULE: Evidence that one did or did not Section 35. Unaccepted offer
do a certain thing at one time is not admissible to
prove that he did or did not do the same or a similar This section complements the rule on tender of
thing at another time payment (Art. 1256, Civil Code) by providing that said
offer of payment must be made in writing. Such
EXCEPTIONS: tender of payment must, however, be followed by
Where the evidence or similar acts may prove: consignation of the amount in court in order to
1. a specific intent or knowledge; produce the effects of valid payment.
2. identity;
3. a plan, system or scheme; The rule covers:
4. a specific habit; 1. payment of sum of money - if the amount is
5. stablished customs, usages and the like short of the amount of liability or not in the
currency which is the legal tender here in the
Reason for the Rule Philippines, the creditor has a reason not to
To compel the defendant to meet charges of which accept the tender. Or even if the legal tender
the indictment gives him no information, confuses is not that one to which the parties agreed
him in his defense, raises a variety of issue, and thus 2. delivery of document – if not that agreed
diverts the attention of the court from the charge document, creditor may refused acceptance;
immediately before it. It is an application of the 3. delivery of personal property – creditor may
principle that the evidence must be confined to the refuse and it does not amount to a tender if
point in issue in the case on trial. In other words, the personal property is not that one agreed
evidence of collateral offenses must not be received upon
as substantive evidence of the offense on trial.
Delivery or unaccepted offer does not release the
SEC. 34 IS THE SECOND BRANCH OF THE RULE debtor from obligation but it can excuse the debtor
OF RES INTER ALIOS ACTA AND APPLIES TO from delivery.
BOTH CIVIL AND CRIMINAL CASES. This section
just like the first branch of the res inter alias acta rule Upon a valid unaccepted offer, the creditor shall
provided for in Sec. 28, Rule 130, is strictly enforced absorb all the circumstantial damages to the
in all cases where it is applicable. property. However, the debtor must prove that there
is no negligent on his part.
Evidence of similar offenses involving the making of
other false representations, is admissible against the The court has to resolve the issue on whether there
prisoner to show that heQuickTime™
is aware and aof the falsity of the is a just cause in the refusal if the creditor denied the
statements made by are him
neededin the
to see this present
picture. case and that consignation of the debtor in the basis that there is no
knowing them to be false, he made them with intent just cause.
to deceive.
The requirement that the tender of payment must
Evidence of a number of crimes is admissible in a have been refused without just cause by the creditor
prosecution for robbery where it has the tendency to does not imply that for the judicial authority to accept
identify the accused or show his presence at the consignation it has to examine whether or not the
scene of the crime but not where the evidence is to creditor had a just reason for refusing the tender. In
order that the consignation of an amount or thing may
Page 270 of 289

be made the refusal of the creditor of the tender of Independent of whether the facts stated are true or
payment is enough, without regard to the reason for not, they are relevant since they are the facts in issue
his refusal, which will only be taken into account to or are circumstantial evidence of the facts in issue.
resolve definitely whether the consignation made will
be efficacious against his opposition. TWO CLASSES OF INDEPENDENTLY RELEVANT
STATEMENTS
Section 36. Testimony generally confined to 1. Those statement s which are the very fact in
personal knowledge; hearsay excluded issue;
2. Those statements which are circumstantial
HEARSAY RULE evidence of the fact in issue. It includes the
Any evidence, whether oral or documentary is following:
hearsay if its probative value is not based on the a. Statement of a person showing his
personal knowledge of the witness but on the state of mind that is, his mental
knowledge of some other person not on the witness condition, knowledge, belief,
stand. intention, ill-will, and other emotions;
b. Statements of persons which shows
Reason for Exclusion of Hearsay Evidence his physical condition as illness and
It is excluded because the party against whom it is the like;
presented is deprived of his right and opportunity to c. Statements of a person from which
cross examine the person to whom the statements or an inference may be made as to the
writings are attributed. state of mind of another, that is,
knowledge, belief, motive, good/bad
Hearsay evidence not objected to may be admissible faith of the latter;
but whether objected to or not, has no probative d. Statements which may identify the
value, and as opposed to direct primary evidence, date, place, person in question;
the latter always prevails. e. Statements showing the lack of
credibility of a witness
GENERAL RULE: Hearsay Evidence is inadmissible
Section 37. Dying declaration.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. Dying Declaration DYING DECLARATION - The ante mortem
2. Declaration Against Interest statements made by a person after the mortal wound
3. Act Or Declaration Against Pedigree has been inflicted under the belief that the death is
4. Family Reputation Or Tradition Against certain, stating the fact concerning the cause of and
Pedigree the circumstances surrounding the attack.
5. Common Reputation
6. Res Gestae When Applicable
7. Entries In The Ordinary Course of Business It applies to any case where the death of the
8. Entries In Official Records declarant is the subject of the inquiry.
9. Commercial Lists
10. Learned Treatises REQUISITES:
11. Testimony Or Deposition At A Former 1. That the death is imminent and the declarant
Proceeding is conscious of such fact
2. That the declaration refers to the cause and
Reason for the Exceptions the surrounding circumstances of such
The exceptions are admissible for reasons of death
NECESSITY and TRUSTWORTHINESS.
QuickTime™ and a 3. That the declaration refers to the facts which
are needed to see this picture. the victim is competent to testify to
DOCTRINE OF INDEPENDENTLY RELEVANT 4. That the declaration is offered in a case
STATEMENTS wherein the declarant’s death is subject of
The witness may testify to the statements made by a the inquiry (the victim necessarily must have
person, if for instance, the fact that such statements died)
were made by the latter would indicate the latter’s 5. That the statement must be complete in
mental state and physical condition. itself. (People v. De Joya, 203 SCRA 343).
Reason for its admission
Page 271 of 289

1. Necessity – because the declarant’s death 4. That the declarant had no motive to falsify
renders impossible his taking the witness and he believed such actual declarant to be
stand true.
2. Trustworthiness – at the point of death, every
motive for falsehood is silenced. The mind is Reasons for such admission
induced by the most powerful consideration 1. Necessity – such declarations are the only
to speak the truth. mode of proof available
2. Trustworthiness – persons do not make
Determination of consciousness of impending statements that are disadvantageous to
death: themselves without substantial reason to
1. utterances believe that the statements are true. Self-
2. circumstances – that at the time of the interest induces men to be cautious in saying
making of the declaration, the declarant did anything against themselves. In other words,
not expect to survive the injury from which he we can safely trust a man when he speaks
actually died against his interest.
3. actual character and seriousness of his
wounds Interest covered:
4. by his conduct. 1. proprietary interest
2. penal interest
A dying declaration may be oral or written or made by 3. pecuniary interest
signs which could be interpreted and testified to by a
witness thereto. The declarant must realize at the very time of making
the declaration that his declaration is against his
There must be settled, hopeless expectation that interest, that a reasonable man in his position would
death is at hand. It is sufficient that he believed not have made the declaration unless he believed it
himself in imminent danger of death at the time of to be true.
such declaration.
It is essential that at the time of the statement, the
Dying declarations favorable to the accused are declarant’s interest affected thereby should be
admissible. actual/real/apparent not merely contingent, future or
unconditional, otherwise, the declaration would not in
Dying declarations may also be regarded as part of reality be against interest.
the res gestae as they were made soon after the
startling occurrence without the opportunity for Section 39. Act or declaration about pedigree.
fabrication or concoction.
Section 40. Family reputation or tradition.
Dying declaration is NOT considered as a
confidential communication between the spouses. Section 39 Section 40
Act or declaration Family reputation or
A dying declaration may be attacked on the ground against pedigree tradition regarding
that any of the requisites for its admissibility are not pedigree
present and the same may be impeached in the Witness need not be a Witness is a member
same manner as the testimony of any of the witness member of the family of the family
on the stand. Testimony is about Testimony is about
what declarant, who is family reputation or
Section 38. Declaration against interest. dead or unable to tradition covering
QuickTime™ and a
testify, he said matters of pedigree.
REQUISITES: are needed to see this picture. concerning the
1. That the declarant is dead and unable to pedigree of the
testify. declarant’s family
2. That it relates to facts against the interest of
the declarant. PEDIGREE – includes relationship, family genealogy,
3. That at the time he made the said declaration birth, marriage, death, the dates when, and the placer
the declarant was aware that the same was where these facts occurred and the names of their
contrary to his aforesaid interest; and relatives. It embraces also facts of family history
intimately connected with pedigree.
Page 272 of 289

relate to the 2. verbal acts must

Section 41. Common reputation. circumstances of the characterize or
startling occurrence; explain the equivocal
THE FOLLOWING MAY BE ESTABLISHED BY and act;
COMMON REPUTATION: 3. The statement must 3. equivocal act must be
1. matters of public interest more than 30 years be spontaneous. relevant to the issue;
old; and
2. matters of general interest more than 30 4. Verbal act must be
years old; contemporaneous
3. matters respecting marriage or moral with the equivocal act.
character and related facts;
4. Individual moral character. Grounds for admissibility
1. Necessity – natural
COMMON REPUTATION – is the definite opinion of and spontaneous
the community in which the fact to be proved is utterances are more
known or exists. It means the general or convincing than the
substantially undivided reputation, as distinguished testimony of the same
from a partial or qualified one, although it need not be person on the stand.
unanimous. 2. Trustworthiness – the
statement is made
As a general rule, the reputation of a person should indistinctively. The
be that existing in the place of his residence; it may facts speaking thru the
also be that existing in the place where he is best party not the party
known. talking about the facts.
EVIDENCE OF NEGATIVE GOOD REPUTE

Where the foundation proof shows that the witness It is essential that spontaneous statements should
was in such position that he would have heard have been caused by something startling enough to
reports derogatory to one’s character, the reputation produce nervous excitement. The declarant must be
testimony may be predicated on the absence of a witness to the event to which the utterance relates.
reports of bad reputation or on the fact that the He must have personally observed the fact. What
witness heard nothing against the person. the law distrusts is not the “after speech” but the after
thought.
Section 42. Part of res gestae
Distinctions between Res Gestae in connection
RES GESTAE – literally means things done; it with a homicidal act and dying declaration
includes circumstances, facts, and declarations RES GESTAE IN DYING
incidental to the main facts or transaction necessary CONNECTION WITH DECLARATIONS
to illustrate its character and also includes acts, A HOMICIDAL ACT
words, or declarations which are closely connected May be made by the Can be made only by
therewith as to constitute part of the transaction. killer himself after or the victim.
during the killing OR
TWO TYPES OF RES GESTAE that of a 3rd person.
SPONTANEOUS VERBAL ACTS May precede or be Made only after the
STATEMENTS made after the homicidal attack has
spontaneous statements statements homicidal attack was been committed.
in connection with a accompanied
QuickTime™ and a by AN committed.
startling occurrenceare needed to see
EQUIVOCAL
this picture. ACT Justification in the Trustworthiness based
relating to that fact and MATERIAL TO THE spontaneity of the upon in its being given
in effect forming part ISSUE AND giving it a statement. in awareness of
thereof; legal significance impending death.
REQUISITES Distinctions between verbal acts and

1. there must be a 1. the act or occurrence spontaneous statements
startling occurrence; characterized must be VERBAL ACTS SPONTANEOUS
2. the statement must equivocal;
Page 273 of 289

STATEMENTS Probative value: only prima facie evidence of the

The res gestae is the The res gestae is the facts stated therein.
equivocal act. startling occurrence
Verbal act must be Statements may be It is not essential for the officer making the official
contemporaneous with made prior, or statement to have a personal knowledge of the facts
or accompany the immediately after the stated by him, it being sufficient that the official
equivocal act. startling occurrence. information was acquired by officers who prepared
the report from persons who not only have personal
Section 43. Entries in the course of business knowledge of the facts stated but must have the duty
to give such statements for the record.
REQUISITES:
1. That the entrant made the entry in his People v. Cabrera Jr., G.R. No. 138266, April 30,
professional capacity or in the performance 2003
of a duty; It is well settled that entries in the police blotter
2. The entry was made in the ordinary course of should not be given due significance or probative
business or entry; value as they are not conclusive evidence of the truth
3. The entries must have been made at or near of their contents but merely of the fact that they were
the time of the transaction to which they recorded. Hence, they do not constitute conclusive
relate; proof.
4. The entrant must have been in a position to
know the facts stated in the entries; Section 45. Commercial list and the like
5. The entrant must be deceased or unable to REQUISITES:
testify. 1. Statements of matters of interest to persons
engaged in an occupation;
The law does not fix any precise moment when the 2. The statements must be contained in a list,
entry should be made. It is sufficient that the entry register, periodical or other published
was made within a reasonable period of time so that compilation;
it may appear to have taken place while the memory 3. The compilation was published for use by
of the facts was unimpaired. persons engaged in that occupation; and
4. Is generally relied upon by them.
How regularity of the entries proved
It may be proved by the form in which they appear in Reasons for admission:
the corresponding book. 1. Necessity – because of the unusual
accessibility of the persons responsible for
Section 44. Entries in official records the compilation of matters contained in a list,
register, periodical or other published
REQUISITES: compilation and tremendous inconvenience it
1. that it was made by a public officer or by would cause to the court if it would issue
another person specially enjoined by the law summons to these numerous individuals.
to do so; and 2. Trustworthiness – they have no motive to
2. that it was made any a public officer in the deceive and they further realize that unless
performance of his duty specially enjoined by the list, register, periodical or other published
law; and compilation are prepared with care and
3. The public officer or the other person has accuracy, their work will have no commercial
sufficient knowledge of the facts by him and probative value.
stated, which must have been acquired by
him personally or through
QuickTime™ and aofficial information.
Section 46. Learned Treatises
Reasons for admission In order that a published treatise, periodical, or

1. Necessity – practical impossibility of requiring pamphlet on a subject of law, history, science, or art
the official’s attendance as a witness to may be admissible, it is necessary either:
testify to the innumerable transactions 1. That the court can take judicial notice of it; or
occurring in the course of his duty. 2. A witness expert on the subject testifies that
2. Trustworthiness – there is a presumption of the writer of the statement in the treatise,
regularity in the performance of official duty. periodical, or pamphlet is recognized in his
profession or calling as expert in the subject.
Page 274 of 289

the inquiry relates to and who possesses special

Reasons for admission knowledge on questions on which he proposes to
1. Necessity – even if such person is legally express an opinion.
procurable, the expense is frequently
disproportionate. There is no definite standard of determining the
2. Trustworthiness – learned writers have no degree of skill or knowledge that a witness must
motive to misrepresent. He is aware that his possess in order to testify as an expert.
work will be carefully scrutinized by the
learned members of his profession and that It is sufficient that the following factors are
he may be subject to criticisms and ultimately present:
rejected as an authority of the subject matter 1. training and education
if his conclusions are found to be invalid. 2. particular, first hand familiarity with the facts
of the case
Section 47. Testimony or deposition at a former 3. presentation of authorities or standards upon
proceeding which his opinion is based.
REQUISITES: An expert witness may base his opinion either on the

1. The testimony or depositions of a witness first-hand knowledge of the facts or on the basis of
deceased or unable to testify; hypothetical questions where the facts are presented
2. The testimony was given in a former case or to him and on the assumption that they are true,
proceeding, judicial or administrative; formulates his opinion on the hypothesis.
3. Involving the same parties;
4. Relating to the subject matter; Expert evidence is admissible only if:
5. The adverse party having had an opportunity 1. the matter to be testified requires expertise;
to cross-examine him. and
2. The witness has been qualified as an expert.
How to present an expert witness

OPINION RULE 1. Introduce and qualify the witness;
2. Let him give his factual testimony, if he has
OPINION – an inference or conclusion drawn from knowledge of the facts;
facts observed. 3. Begin the hypothetical question by asking
him to assume certain facts as true;
Section 48. General Rule 4. Conclude the question, by first asking the
expert if he has an opinion on a certain point
GENERAL RULE: Witnesses must give the facts and assuming that these facts are true and
not their inference, conclusions, or opinions secondly, asking him, after he has answered
affirmatively, to give his opinion on the point;
EXCEPTIONS: 5. After he has stated his opinion, ask him to
1. On a matter requiring SPECIAL knowledge, give his reasons.
skill, experience or training which he is
shown to possess (Section 49); Hypothetical questions may be asked on an expert to
2. The identity of a person about whom he ahs elicit his opinion. Courts, however, are NOT
adequate knowledge (Section 50[a]); necessarily bound by the expert’s findings.
3. A handwriting with which he has sufficient
familiarity (Section 50 [b]); Section 50. Opinion of ordinary witness
4. The mental sanity of a and
QuickTime™ person
a with whom he
is sufficiently acquainted
are needed (Section 50[c])
to see this picture. ORDINARY OPINION EVIDENCE – that which is
5. The witness’ impressions of the emotion, given by a witness who is of ordinary capacity and
behavior, condition, or appearance of a who has by opportunity acquired a particular
person (Section 50[d]) knowledge which is outside the limits of common
observation and which may be of value in elucidating
Section 49. Opinion of expert witnesses a matter under consideration.
EXPERT WITNESS – one who belongs to the

profession or calling to which the subject matter of CHARACTER AS EVIDENCE
Page 275 of 289

RULE 131
Section 51. Character evidence not generally BURDEN OF PROOF AND PRESUMPTIONS
admissible
Section 1. Burden of proof
CHARACTER – the aggregate of the moral qualities
which belong to and distinguish an individual person. BURDEN OF PROOF/RISK OF NON-PERSUASION
- the duty of a party to present evidence on the facts
GENERAL RULE: character evidence is not in issue necessary to establish his claim or defense
admissible in evidence by the amount of evidence required by law.
EXCEPTIONS: PROOF– the establishment of a requisite degree of

belief in the mind of the trier of fact as to the fact in
CRIMINAL CASES issue.
1. Accused may prove his good moral character
which is pertinent to the moral trait involved Two separate burdens in burden of proof:
in the offense charge; 1. burden of going forward – that of producing
2. The prosecution may not prove bad moral evidence
character of the accused unless in rebuttal 2. Burden of persuasion – the burden of
when the latter opens the issue by persuading the trier of fact that the burdened
introducing evidence of his good moral party is entitled to prevail.
character;
3. As to the offended party, his good or bad UPON WHOM BURDEN OF PROOF RESTS:
moral character may be proved as long as it
tends to establish the probability or A. Civil Cases
improbability of the offense charged. 1. the plaintiff has the burden of proof to show
the truth of his allegations if the defendant
Exceptions to this exception: raises a negative defense;
2. The defendant has the burden of proof if he
1. proof of the bad character of the victim raises an affirmative defense on the
in a murder case is not admissible if complaint of the plaintiff.
the crime was committed through
treachery and evident premeditation; NOTE: In a civil case, the plaintiff is always
and compelled to allege affirmative assertions in his
2. In prosecution for rape, evidence of complaint. When he alleges a cause of action, he will
complainant’s past sexual conduct, be forced to allege that he has a right and that such
opinion thereof or of his/her reputation right was violated by the other party. Thus he has
shall not be admitted unless, and only the duty to prove the existence of this affirmative
to the extent that the court finds that allegation.
such evidence is material and relevant
to the case. (Rape Shield, RA 8505 When the defendant files his answer and sets up
Section 6) purely a negative defense and no evidence is
presented by both sides, it is the defendant who
CIVIL CASES would win the case since the plaintiff has not
The moral character of either party thereto CANNOT presented the quantum evidence required by law.
be proved UNLESS it is pertinent to the issue of On the other hand, when the defendant in his answer
character involved in the case. sets up an affirmative defense, if there is no evidence
QuickTime™ and a presented by both sides, it is the defendant who will
AS TO WITNESSES are needed to see this picture. lose the case.
Both criminal and civil, the bad moral character of a
witness may always be proved by either party B. Criminal Cases
(Section 11, Rule 132) but not of his good moral The burden of proof is on the prosecution by reason
character, unless such character has been of presumption of innocence.
impeached. (Section 14)
The burden of proof as to the guilt of the accused
must be borne by the prosecution. It is required that
courts determine first if the evidence of the
Page 276 of 289

prosecution has at least shown a prima facie case pleadings placed it.
before considering the evidence of the defense. If Generally determined Generally determined by
the prosecution does not have a prima facie case, it by the pleadings filed the developments of the
is futile to waste time in considering the evidence by the party. trial, or by the provisions of
presented by the defense. Should the prosecution substantive law or
succeed in establishing a prima facie case against procedural rules which
the accused, the burden is shifted upon the accused may relieve the party from
to prove otherwise. presenting evidence on
the facts alleged.
Under the Speedy Trial Act, if the accused was NOT
brought to trial within the time required, the UPON WHOM BURDEN OF EVIDENCE RESTS
information shall be dismissed on the motion of the
accused. In this case, THE BURDEN OF PROOF of A. Civil Cases:
supporting such motion is with the accused (Section The plaintiff is to prove his affirmative
13, Republic Act 8493). allegations in his counter claim and his affirmative
defenses.
DEGREE OF PROOF THAT SATISFIES THE
BURDEN OF PROOF B. Criminal Cases:
The PROSECUTION has to prove its
A. Civil Cases – Preponderance of evidence affirmative allegations in the information regarding
the elements of the crime as well as the attendant
B. Criminal Cases circumstances; while the DEFENSE has to prove its
To sustain conviction – Evidence of guilt beyond affirmative allegations regarding the existence of
reasonable doubt. justifying or exempting circumstances, absolutory
causes or mitigating circumstances.
Preliminary investigation – Engenders a well founded
belief of the fact of the commission of a crime. PRINCIPLE OF NEGATIVE AVERMENTS
Issuance of warrant of arrest – Probable cause, i.e. GENERAL RULE: Negative allegations need not be
that there is reasonable ground to believe that the proved, whether in a civil or criminal action.
accused that committed an offense.
EXCEPTION: When such negative allegations are
C. Administrative Cases – Substantial evidence. essential parts of the cause of action or defense in a
civil case, or are essential ingredients of the offense
HIERARCHY OF EVIDENCE in a criminal case or defenses thereto.
1. proof beyond reasonable doubt
2. clear and convincing evidence HOWEVER, in CIVIL CASES, even if the
3. preponderance of evidence negative allegation is an essential part of the
4. substantial evidence cause of action or defense, such negative
allegation does not have to be proved if it is
BURDEN OF EVIDENCE - logical necessity on a only for the purpose of denying the existence
party during a particular time of the trail to create a of a document which should properly be in
prima facie case in his favor or to destroy that the custody of the adverse party.
created against him by presenting evidence.
In a CRIMINAL CASE, the rule if the subject
In both civil and criminal cases, the burden of of a negative averment inheres in the offense
evidence lies on the party who and
QuickTime™ asserts
a an affirmative as an essential ingredient thereof, the
allegation. are needed to see this picture. prosecution has the burden of proving the
same. In view however, of the difficult office
Distinctions Between Burden of Proof and of proving a negative allegation, the
Burden of Evidence prosecution, under such circumstance, need
BURDEN OF PROOF BURDEN OF EVIDENCE to do no more than make a prima facie case
Does not shift and Shifts from party to party from the best evidence obtainable. (People
remains throughout depending upon the v. Cabral, 68 Phil. 564)
the entire case exactly exigencies of the case in
where the original the course of the trial
Page 277 of 289

PRESUMPTION - An inference as to the existence or 2. ESTOPPEL BY DEED (Rule 131, Sec. 2 (b))
non-existence of a fact which courts are permitted to – the tenant is not permitted to deny title of
draw from the proof of other facts. his landlord at the time of the
commencement of the land-lord tenant
A presumption shifts the burden of going forward with relationship. If the title asserted is one that is
the evidence. It imposes on the party against whom alleged to have been acquired subsequent to
it is directed the burden of going forward with the commencement of that relation, the
evidence to meet or rebut the presumption. presumption will not apply.
Section 3. Disputable presumptions

CLASSIFICATION OF PRESUMPTIONS
1. PRESUMPTION JURIS OR OF LAW – is a CLASSES OF DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTIONS
deduction which the law expressly directs to
be made from particular facts. 1. Presumption of Innocence - Applies to both
2. PRESUMPTION HOMINIS OR OF FACT – is civil and criminal cases
a deduction which reason draws from facts
proved without an express direction from the This presumption accompanies the accused
law to that effect throughout the trial down to the moment of
conviction. This presumption disappears after
PRESUMPTIONS OF PRESUMPTIONS OF conviction and the appellate court then will
LAW FACT presume the accused guilty.
Certain inference must Discretion is vested in
be made whenever the the tribunal as to By reason of this presumption, an accused is
facts appear which drawing the inference. not called upon to offer evidence on his
furnish the basis of the behalf for his freedom is forfeited only if the
inference. requisite quantum of proof necessary for
Reduced to fixed rules Derived wholly and conviction be in existence.
and form a part of the directly from the
system of circumstances of the BASIS: founded on the principles of justice
jurisprudence. particular case by and is intended not to protect the guilty but to
means of the common prevent the conviction of an innocent
experience of persons.
mankind.
Equipose Rule: Where the evidence gives
PRESUMPTION JURIS may be divided into: rise to two probabilities, one consistent with
1. CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTION (juris et de defendant’s innocence, and another
jure) – which is a presumption of law that is indicative of his guilt, that which is favorable
not permitted to be overcome by any proof to to the accused should be considered.
the contrary; and
2. DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTIONS (juris 2. Presumption that a person takes ordinary
tantum) - is that which the law permits to be care of his concerns: (Vales v. Villa, 35
overcome or contradicted by proofs to the PHIL 769)
contrary; otherwise the same remains
satisfactory. All men are presumed to be sane and normal
and subject to be moved by substantially the
Section 2. Conslusive Presumptions same motives.
QuickTime™ and a
CLASSES OF CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTIONS
are needed to see this picture. When of age and sane, they must take care
1. ESTOPPEL IN PAIS (Rule 131, Sec. 2(a)) – of themselves. Courts operate not because
whenever a party has, by his own one person has been defeated or overcome
declaration, act, or omission, intentionally by another but because he has been
and deliberately lead another to believe a defeated or overcome illegally. There must
particular thing to be true and act upon such be a violation of law, the commission of what
belief, he cannot, in any litigation arising out the law known as an actionable wrong before
of such declaration, act or omission, be the courts is authorized to lay hold of the
permitted to falsify it. situation and remedy it.
Page 278 of 289

6. Omnia praesumuntur rite et solemniter

3. Presumption from possession of stolen esse acta donec probetur in contrarium –
goods: all things are presumed to have been done
regularly and with due formality until the
This is not in conflict with the presumption of contrary is proved.
innocence. At the start of the criminal case,
the court will apply the presumption of While ordinarily, irregularity will not be presumed,
innocence. But once the prosecution is able an adverse assumption may arise when the
to prove that a certain object has been official act in question appears to be irregular
unlawfully taken, that there is a crime of theft upon its face.
committed and that the prosecution has also
proven that the accused is in possession of 7. Presumptions of regularity of judicial
this object unlawfully taken, and then the proceedings, that a court, or judge acting
presumption of innocence disappears. The as such, whether in the Philippines or
new presumption of guilt takes place. elsewhere, was acting in a lawful exercise
jurisdiction.
4. Presumption that a person in a public
office was regularly appointed or elected The copurt rendering the judgement is
to it: presumed to have jurisdiction over the
subject matter and the poarties and to have
REASON: It would cause great rendered a judgement valid in every respect.
inconvenience if in the first instance strict
proof were required of appointment or Jurisdiction is presumed in all cases, be it
election to office in all cases where it might superior or inferior court.
be collaterally in issue.
However, jurisdiction to render a judgement
The burden of proof is on the adverse party in a particular case or against a particular
to show that he was not appointed or case, or against persons may not be
designated. presumed when the record itself shows that
jurisdiction has not been acquired or there
5. Presumption that an official duty has was something on the record showing the
been regularly performed absence of jurisdiction.
Reasons: 8. Presumption that private transactions

1. innocence and not the wrongdoing is have been done fair and regular: An
to be presumed individual intends to do right rather than
2. an official oath will not be violated wrong and intends to only whet he has the
3. a republican form of government right to do.
cannot survive un less a limit is placed
upon controversies and certain trust In the absence of proof to the contrary, there
and confidence reposed in each is a presumption that all men act fairly
government, department, or agent at honestly, and in good faith.
least to the extent of such
presumption. 9. Presumption that an ordinary course of
business has been followed: Those who
The presumption of regularity and legality of were engaged in a given trade or business
official acts is applicable
QuickTime™ and ato criminal as well are presumed to be acquainted with the
as civil cases.
are needed to see this picture. general customs and usages of the
occupation and with such other facts as are
This presumption of authority is not confined necessarily incident to the proper conduct of
to official appointees. It has been extended the business.
to persons who have been appointed
pursuant to a local or special statute to act in
quasi-public or quasi-official capacities and to
professional men like surgeons and lawyers. RULE 132
PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE
Page 279 of 289

EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES 3. Not to be examined except only as to matters

pertinent to the issue;
Section 1. Examination to be done in open court. 4. Not to give an answer which will tend to
subject him to a penalty for an offense unless
How oral evidence is given otherwise provided by law;
It is usually given orally in open court. Therefore, 5. Not to give an answer which will tend to
generally, the testimonies of witnesses cannot be degrade his reputation, unless it be to the
presented in affidavits. very fact at issue or to a fact from which the
fact at issue would be presumed. But a
One instance when the testimonies of witnesses may witness must answeer to the fact of his
be given in affidavits is under the Rules of Summary previous final conviction for an offense.
Procedure.
Right of a witness to be free from personal
Purpose: to enable the court to judge the credibility violence
of the witness by the witness’ manner of testifying, The act of the judge in seizing the witness by the
their intelligence, and appearance. shoulder and turning him about was unwarrante4d
and an interference with that freedom from unlawful
GENERAL RULE: Testimony of witnesses shall be personal violence to which every witness is entitled
given under oath or affirmation. while giving the testimony in court, which his attorney
had the right to protest and demand that the incident
Two fold object in requiring a witness to be be made of record.
sworn:
1. by affecting the conscience of the witness to Scope of the right against self-incrimination
compel him to speak the truth; 1. No person should be compelled to be a
2. if he willfully falsifies that truth, that he may witness against himself;
be punished by perjury. 2. The rule may be invoked in any court or
proceedings;
The right to have the witness sworn may be waived, if 3. The rule covers only testimonial compulsion
a party fails to object to the taking of the testimony of and production by him of incriminating
a witness without the administration of an oath, he documents and articles.
will be deemed to have waived his objection.
Rationale against testimonial compulsion
Questions propounded to a witness must: The court may not extract from the defendant’s own
1. not be indefinite or uncertain; lips and against his will an admission of his guilt.
2. be relevant;
3. not be argumentative; When is an act testimonial?
4. not for conclusion of law; If it explicitly or implicitly relate a factual assertion or
5. not call for opinion or hearsay evidence; discloses information.
6. not call for illegal answer;
7. not call for self-incriminating testimony; When is there compulsion?
8. not be leading; It is present only when a witness has asserted a right
9. not be misleading; to refuse to disclose self-incriminating information
10. not to tend reputation of witness; and this refusal has been overridden.
11. not to be repetitions;
12. not call for a narration. Forced Reenactment comes within the ban since
prohibition against testimonial compulsion extends to
Section 2. ProceedingsQuickTime™
to be recorded
and a those communicative in nature.
Section 3. Rights and obligations of a witness Rights of a defendant

He has the right to be exempt from being a witness
RIGHTS OF A WITNESS against himself, cannot be compelled be compelled
1. To be protected from irrelevant , improper, or to testify or produce evidence in the criminal case in
insulting questions, and from harsh or which he is the accused or one of the accused, he
insulting demeanor; cannot be compelled to do so even by subpoena or
2. Not to be detained loinger than the interest of other process or order of the court. He cannot be
justice require;
Page 280 of 289

required wither for the prosecution, for co-accused, or

even for himself. GENERAL RULE: One who voluntarily offers a
witness’ testimony is bound by such (i.e. cannot
An ordinary witness of a party in a civil action impeach or contradict),
An ordinary witness may be compelled to testify by
subpoena having only the right to refuse to answer a EXCEPTIONS:
particular incriminating question at the time it is put to i. Hostile witness
him. ii. Adverse party or rep. of adverse party
iii. Not voluntarily offered but required by law
Limitation if a witness is a party in a civil action (e.g., subscribing witnesses to a will)
Before the plaintiff can compel the defendant to be a
witness, the plaintiff must first prove that he has People v. Givera 349 SCRA 573 (2001)
submitted written interrogatories of the defendant. Facts: A was charged with murder. The prosecution
formally offered the testimony of the medico-legal
The exception under no. 4 refers to IMMUNITY officer taken in the first case involving 3 other
STATUTES wherein the witness is granted immunity accused for the death of the same victim.
from criminal prosecution for offenses admitted in his Issue: Whether the said testimony is admissible.
testimony, e.g. under Sec. 8, R.A. 1379, the law Held: No. The defense did not have the opportunity
providing for the forfeiture of unlawfully acquired to cross-examine the medico-legal officer so his
property; and under PD 749, in prosecutions for testimony cannot be used in evidence against the
bribery and graft. accused.
Impeaching witness of adverse party
CLASSIFICATION OF IMMUNITY STATUTES a. Contradictory evidence from testimony in same
1. Use Immunity – Only prohibits the unse of case
witness’ compelled testimony and its fruits in b. Evidence of prior inconsistent statement
any manner in connection with the criminial c. Evidence of bias, interest, prejudice or
prosecution of the witness. It does not incompetence
render a witness immune from prosecution. d. Evidence of mental, sensory derangement or
2. Transactional Immunity – grants immunity defect
to the witness from prosecution for an e. Evidence of conviction of an offense which affects
offense to which his compelled testimony credibility of witness
relates.
People v. Peralta 350 SCRA 198 (2001)
NOTE: For purposes of evidence, right against self- Facts: A was found guilty of murder. A attempted to
incrimination refers only to testimonial compulsion. impeach the credibility of 3 prosecution witnesses,
especially witness W. A pointed out that W testified
NOTE: Right against self-incrimination is granted that as the victim’s fraternity brother, he would do
only in favor of individuals. “anything and everything” for the victim.
Issue: Whether A was able to properly impeach the
Right against self-incrimination extends to witnesses on account of bias.
administrative proceedings with a criminal or penal Held: No. A witness may be said to biased when
aspect. his relation to the cause or to the parties is such that
he has an incentive to exaggerate or give false color
When leading questions allowed or pervert the truth, or to state what is false. To
a. On cross-examination impeach a biased witness, the counsel must lay the
b. On preliminary matters proper foundation of the bias by asking the witness
c. Difficulty in gettingQuickTime™direct
and a and intelligible facts constituting the bias. In this case, there was no
answers are needed to see this picture. proper impeachment by bias of the 3 prosecution
d. Unwilling or hostile witness witnesses. W’s testimony that he would do anything
e. Adverse party or an officer, director or a for his fellow brothers was too broad and general so
corporation or partnership which is an as to constitute a motive to lie before the court.
adverse party
A misleading question, though not objected to, will People v. Macandog et. al. 358 SCRA 462 (2001)
not be evidence of the fact assumed by the improper Facts: A was accused of the murder of V. E, a
question. witness of the prosecution, testified that A was
Page 281 of 289

among those present at the crime scene. A argued a. Witness retains no recollection of the
that E’s testimony should not have been given particular facts;
credence because she was biased, as she was the b. But he his able to swear that the record or
sister of the deceased. writing correctly stated the transaction when
Issue: Whether E is a biased witness. made
Held: No. The fact that E is the sister of deceased
does not per se make her a biased witness. Mere Revival of present memory v. Revival of past
relationship of the victim to a witness does not recollection
automatically impair her credibility and render her PRESENT PAST RECOLLECTION
testimony less worthy of credence where no improper RECOLLECTION RECORDED
motive can be ascribed. Such relationship lends more REVIVED
credence to the testimony considering her natural Applies if the witness Applies where the
interest to see the guilty punished. It would be remembers the facts witness does not recall
unnatural for a relative who is interested in regarding his entries the facts involved
vindicating the crime to accuse anyone other than the Entitled to greater weight Entitled to lesser weight
real culprit. Evidence is the testimony Evidence is the writing or
record
IMPEACHING OWN WITNESS Rule of evidence affected Rule of evidence affected
is competency of is the best evidence rule
GENERAL RULE: witness, examination of
A party is not allowed to impeach his own witness witness (laying the
predicate)
EXCEPTIONS:
a. Unwilling or adverse witness so declared by Additional modes of authenticating a private
the court writing:
b. Witness who is also an adverse party a. Doctrine of self-authentication
c. Witnesses required by law (e.g., subscribing Where the facts in the writing could only have
witnesses to a will) been known by the writer
May be impeached in all respects as if called by
other party, EXCEPT by evidence of bad moral b. Rule of authentication by the adverse party
character. Where reply of the adverse party refers to
and affirms the sending and his receipt of the
When a witness who is partly cross-examined dies, letter in question, a copy of which the
his direct examination cannot be expunged. In proponent is offering as evidence.
People v. Señeris (99 SCRA 92), the direct
testimony of a witness who dies before conclusion of People v. Banzales 336 SCRA 64 (2000)
the cross can be stricken only insofar as not covered Facts: A was charged with illegal recruitment. The
by the cross. However, Professor Bautista does not POEA issued a certificate stating that A was an
like this decision because although the cross was unlicensed illegal recruiter. A argued that the
substantially complete, still, the court ordered the prosecution filed to establish 1 element of the offense
direct examination to be stricken out. considering that no representative of the POEA was
presented in court to testify as to the authenticity of the
REQUISITES OF REVIVAL OF PRESENT certificate.
MEMORY: Issue: Whether authenticity of the certificate needs to
a. Memorandum has been written by him or be proved.
under his direction; and Held: No. A POEA certification is a public document
b. Written byTIFFhim: QuickTime™ and a
issued by a public officer in the performance of an
i. When the
(Uncompressed) decompressor
fact
are needed occurred
to see this picture. or immediately official duty; hence it is prima facie evidence of the facts
therein stated (Rule 132 § 23). Public documents are
thereafter; or
entitled to a presumption of regularity; consequently, the
ii. At any other time when the fact was fresh
burden of proof rests upon him who alleges the
in his memory and he knew that the contrary.
same was correctly recorded
REQUISITES OF REVIVAL OF PAST Estrada v. Aniano Desierto 356 SCRA 108 (2001)
RECOLLECTION:
Page 282 of 289

Facts: The Court, in a previous decision, relied not

upon the original but only a copy of the Angara Diary EXCEPTION:
as published in the Philippine Daily Inquirer. If there was repeated reference thereto in the course
Issue: Does the use of the AD violate the rule on of the trial by adverse party’s counsel and of the
authentication of private writings and best evidence? court, indicating that the documents were part of the
Held: No. prosecution’s evidence.
1. The Supreme Court, citing Wigmore, stated that: “
Production of the original may be dispensed with, in Two requisites must concur (People v. Napta)
the trial court’s discretion, whenever in the case in a. The document must have been duly
hand the opponent does not bona fide dispute the identified by testimony duly recorded.
contents of the document and no other useful b. The document must have been incorporated
purpose will be served by requiring publication. to the records of the case.
2. Estrada had an opportunity to object to the
admissibility of the AD when he filed his A party who has introduced evidence is not entitled
Memorandum, Supplemental Memorandum and as matter of right to withdraw it in finding that it does
Second Supplemental Memorandum, but he did not not answer his purpose; BUT he may withdraw an
object to its admissibility. He was not therefore offer of an exhibit any time before the court has
denied due process. passed on its admissibility.
Evidence offered is presumed to be admissible or
AUTHENTICATION NOT REQUIRED FOR: competent until the contrary has been established.
a. Ancient document
i. More than 30 years old Thus, the opposing party must OBJECT to its
ii. Contains no alterations or circumstances introduction.
of suspicion
iii. Produced from a custody in which it WHEN TO OBJECT
would naturally be found if genuine Offer Time to Object
b. Public document or record Offered orally Made immediately after
c. Notarial document acknowledged, proved or the offer is made
certified Question propounded in Shall be made as soon
d. Authenticity and due execution has been the course of the oral as the grounds thereof
expressly or impliedly admitted (e.g., examination of a witness shall become reasonably
actionable documents, failure to deny under apparent
oath) Offer of evidence in Shall be objected to
writing within 3 days after notice
Computer printouts are inadmissible unless properly of the offer unless a
authenticated by a witness attesting that they came different period is allowed
from the computer system or that the data stored in by the court.
the system were not and could not have been
tampered with before the same were printed out. WHEN A MOTION TO STRIKE OUT ANSWER IS
PROPER
EVIDENCE OF GENUINENESS OF a. When the witness answered the question
HANDWRITING: before the counsel has a chance to object
a. Witness actually saw person writing the a. Where a question which is not objectionable
instrument may be followed by an objectionable
b. Familiar with handwriting and witness can unresponsive answer
give opinion b. Where a witness has volunteered statements
c. Comparison of QuickTime™
questioned and a
handwriting and in such a way that the party has not been
admitted genuine specimens
are needed to see this picture. able to object thereto
d. Expert evidence c. Where a witness testifies without a question
being addressed to him
OFFER AND OBJECTION d. Where a witness testifies beyond the ruling of
the court prescribing the limits within which
GENERAL RULE: he may answer
The court shall consider no evidence which has not e. When a witness dies or becomes
been formally offered. The purpose for which the incapacitated to testify and the other party
evidence is offered must be specified.
Page 283 of 289

has not been given the opportunity to cross- to be sufficient for conviction. A judgment of
examine the witness. conviction based on circumstantial evidence can be
There must be an objection first before a sustained only when the circumstances proved form
motion to strike. If the party slept on his an unbroken chain that leads to a fair and reasonable
right to object, he cannot later on avail a conclusion pointing to the accused, to the exclusion
motion to strike to exclude the evidence. of all others, as the culprit. The circumstances proved
must be consistent with each other, consistent with
WHEN A MOTION TO STRIKE OUT IS IMPROPER the hypothesis that the accused is guilty, and at the
a. A party cannot insist that competent and same time inconsistent with any other hypothesis
relevant evidence be stricken out for reasons except that of guilt.
going to his weight, sufficiency or credibility
b. One cannot move to strike it out because it People v. Rayos 351 SCRA 336 (2001)
proves unfavorable to him Facts: A was charged and convicted of the rape-
slay of a 9-year old mental retardate. He argued that
If court improperly excludes otherwise admissible the circumstantial evidence presented by the
evidence, remedy is to tender the excluded evidence, prosecution was not sufficient to establish his guilt
also known as OFFER OF PROOF: beyond reasonable doubt.
a. Documentary – by attaching the document Issue: When is circumstantial evidence sufficient to
or making it part of the record convict?
b. Testimonial – by stating the personal Held: When there are no eyewitnesses to a crime,
circumstances of witness and the substance resort to circumstantial evidence becomes almost
of proposed testimony certainly unavoidable. In rape with homicide, the
evidence against the accused is basically
circumstantial because of the nature of the crime.
The circumstances must be consistent with each
RULE 133 other from which the only rational hypothesis that can
WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE be drawn therefrom would be that the accused is
guilty. The circumstances must create a solid chain of
1. PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT events, coherent and intrinsically believable, that
Æ Does not mean such degree of proof as, pinpoints the accused, to the exclusion of others, as
excluding possibility of error, produces being the perpetrator of the crime and thereby
absolute certainty sufficiently overcome the presumption of innocence
Æ Moral certainty only is required, or that in his favor. The circumstantial pieces of evidence in
degree of proof which produces conviction in this case, taken in their entirety, unmistakably point to
an unprejudiced mind the guilt of A.
2. Circumstantial evidence to sustain conviction:
Mollaneda v. Umacob 358 SCRA 537 (2001)
a. More than one circumstance
Facts: A, the Schools Division Superintendent, was
b. Facts from which inferences are derived are
criminally charged before the court. A was acquitted.
proven
Complainants filed an administrative case against A
c. Combination of all circumstances such as to
to dismiss him from the service. A argued that the
produce conviction beyond reasonable doubt
dismissal of the criminal case against him meant that
3. SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
the administrative case cannot prosper.
Æ That amount of relevant evidence which a
Issue: Whether A is correct.
reasonable mind might accept as adequate
Held: No. The dismissal of a criminal case on the
to justify a conclusion.
ground of insufficiency of evidence against an
QuickTime™ and a
TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor accused who is a respondent in an administrative
People v. Pedigeroare337
neededSCRA 274 (2000)
to see this picture.
case does not foreclose the administrative
Facts: A was convicted of robbery with homicide. A proceeding against him or give him a clean bill of
claimed that the court erred in holding that the health in all respects. In dismissing the case, the
circumstantial evidence presented by the prosecution court is simply saying that the prosecution was
sufficiently established his guilt. unable to prove the guilt of the respondent beyond
Issue: When is circumstantial evidence sufficient to reasonable doubt. In administrative proceedings, the
convict? quantum of proof required is only substantial
Held: Rule 133 § 4 enumerates the 3 elements that evidence. A’s culpability has been proven by
should be present in order for circumstantial evidence
Page 284 of 289

substantial evidence. The dismissal of the criminal equivalent shall have been developed,
case cannot bind this Court in the disposition of the installed, and implemented.
instant administrative case. There was justifiable
ground for A’s dismissal from the service. Section 8. Incorporation by Reference
Information shall not be denied validity or

enforceability solely on the ground that it is not
contained in an electronic data message or electronic
document but is merely incorporated by reference
therein.
Pertinent Provisions of the
Implementing Rules of the E-Commerce Act: Section 9. Use Not Mandatory
Without prejudice to the application of Section 27 of

CHAPTER II the Act and Section 37 of these Rules, nothing in the
LEGAL RECOGNITION OF ELECTRONIC DATA MESSAGES Act or these Rules requires a person to use or accept
AND
information contained in electronic data messages,
ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS electronic documents, or electronic signatures, but a
person's consent to do so may be inferred from the
person's conduct.
Section 7. Legal Recognition of Electronic Data
Messages and Electronic Documents Section 10. Writing
Information shall not be denied validity or Where the law requires a document to be in writing,
enforceability solely on the ground that it is in the or obliges the parties to conform to a writing, or
form of an electronic data message or electronic provides consequences in the event information is
document, purporting to give rise to such legal effect. not presented or retained in its original form, an
Electronic data messages or electronic documents electronic document or electronic data message will
shall have the legal effect, validity or enforceability as be sufficient if the latter:
any other document or legal writing. In particular, a. Maintains its integrity and reliability; and
subject to the provisions of the Act and these Rules: b. Can be authenticated so as to be usable for
a. A requirement under law that information is in subsequent reference, in that:
writing is satisfied if the information is in the a. It has remained complete and unaltered,
form of an electronic data message or apart from the addition of any endorsement
electronic document. and any authorized change, or any change
b. A requirement under law for a person to which arises in the normal course of
provide information in writing to another communication, storage and display; and
person is satisfied by the provision of the b. It is reliable in the light of the purpose for
information in an electronic data message or which it was generated and in the light of all
electronic document. relevant circumstances.
c. A requirement under law for a person to
provide information to another person in a Section 11. Original
specified non-electronic form is satisfied by
the provision of the information in an Where the law requires that a document be
electronic data message or electronic presented or retained in its original form, that
QuickTime™ and a
documentTIFFifare(Uncompressed)
the informationdecompressor
needed to see this picture.
is provided in the requirement is met by an electronic document or
same or substantially the same form. electronic data message if –
d. Nothing limits the operation of any a. There exists a reliable assurance as to the
requirement under law for information to be integrity of the electronic document or electronic data
posted or displayed in specified manner, time message from the time when it was first generated in
or location; or for any information or its final form and such integrity is shown by evidence
document to be communicated by a specified aliunde (that is, evidence other than the electronic
method unless and until a functional data message itself) or otherwise; and
Page 285 of 289

b. The electronic document or electronic data ii. Said method is reliable and
message is capable of being displayed to the person appropriate for the purpose for which
to whom it is to be presented. the electronic document or electronic
c. For the purposes of paragraph (a) above: data message was generated or
i. The criteria for assessing integrity shall be communicated, in the light of all
whether the information has remained complete and circumstances, including any
unaltered, apart from the addition of any relevant agreement;
endorsement and any change which arises in the iii. It is necessary for the party sought to
normal course of communication, storage and be bound, in order to proceed further
display; and with the transaction, to have
ii. The standard of reliability required shall be executed or provided the electronic
assessed in the light of the purpose for which the signature; and,
information was generated and in the light of all iv. The other party is authorized and
relevant circumstances. enabled to verify the electronic
An electronic data message or electronic document signature and to make the decision
meeting and complying with the requirements of to proceed with the transaction
Sections 6 or 7 of the Act shall be the best evidence authenticated by the same.
of the agreement and transaction contained therein. v. The parties may agree to adopt
supplementary or alternative
Section 12. Solemn Contracts procedures provided that the
requirements of paragraph (b) are
No provision of the Act shall apply to vary any and all complied with.
requirements of existing laws and relevant judicial For purposes of subparagraphs (i) and (ii) of
pronouncements respecting formalities required in paragraph (b), the factors referred to in Annex “2”
the execution of documents for their validity. Hence, may be taken into account.
when the law requires that a contract be in some
form in order that it may be valid or enforceable, or Section 14. Presumption Relating to Electronic
that a contract is proved in a certain way, that Signatures
requirement is absolute and indispensable.
In any proceeding involving an electronic signature,
LEGAL RECOGNITION OF ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES the proof of the electronic signature shall give rise to
the rebuttable presumption that:
Section 13. Legal Recognition of Electronic a. The electronic signature is the signature of
Signatures the person to whom it correlates; and
b. The electronic signature was affixed by that
An electronic signature relating to an electronic person with the intention of signing or
document or electronic data message shall be approving the electronic data message or
equivalent to the signature of a person on a written electronic document unless the person
document if the signature: relying on the electronically signed electronic
a. Is an electronic signature as defined in data message or electronic document knows
Section 6(g) of these Rules; and or has notice of defects in or unreliability of
b. Is proved by showing that a prescribed the signature or reliance on the electronic
procedure, not alterable by the parties signature is not reasonable under the
interested in the electronic document or circumstances.
electronic dataQuickTime™message, and a existed under
which: are needed to see this picture. MODES OF AUTHENTICATION
i. A method is used to identify the party
sought to be bound and to indicate Section 15. Method of Authenticating Electronic
said party’s access to the electronic Documents, Electronic Data Messages, and
document or electronic data Electronic Signatures
message necessary for his consent
or approval through the electronic Electronic documents, electronic data messages and
signature; electronic signatures, shall be authenticated by
demonstrating, substantiating and validating a
Page 286 of 289

claimed identity of a user, device, or another entity in established in any legal proceeding, among other
an information or communication system. methods
Until the Supreme Court, by appropriate a. By evidence that at all material times the
rules, shall have so provided, electronic documents, information and communication system or
electronic data messages and electronic signatures, other similar device was operating in a
shall be authenticated, among other ways, in the manner that did not affect the integrity of the
following manner: electronic document or electronic data
a. The electronic signature shall be message, and there are no other reasonable
authenticated by proof that a letter, grounds to doubt the integrity of the
character, number or other symbol in information and communication system;
electronic form representing the persons b. By showing that the electronic document or
named in and attached to or logically electronic data message was recorded or
associated with an electronic data message, stored by a party to the proceedings who is
electronic document, or that the appropriate adverse in interest to the party using it; or
methodology or security procedures, when c. By showing that the electronic document or
applicable, were employed or adopted by a electronic data message was recorded or
person and executed or adopted by such stored in the usual and ordinary course of
person, with the intention of authenticating or business by a person who is not a party to
approving an electronic data message or the proceedings and who did not act under
electronic document; the control of the party using the record.
b. The electronic data message or electronic
document shall be authenticated by proof ADMISSIBILITY AND EVIDENTIAL WEIGHT
that an appropriate security procedure, when
applicable was adopted and employed for the Section 18. Admissibility and Evidential Weight of
purpose of verifying the originator of an Electronic Data Messages and Electronic
electronic data message or electronic Documents
document, or detecting error or alteration in For evidentiary purposes, an electronic document or
the communication, content or storage of an electronic data message shall be the functional
electronic document or electronic data equivalent of a written document under existing laws.
message from a specific point, which, using In any legal proceeding, nothing in the application of
algorithm or codes, identifying words or the rules on evidence shall deny the admissibility of
numbers, encryptions, answers back or an electronic data message or electronic document in
acknowledgement procedures, or similar evidence:
security devices. a. On the sole ground that it is in electronic
form; or
Section 16. Burden of Authenticating Electronic b. On the ground that it is not in the standard
Documents or Electronic Data Messages written form.
The person seeking to introduce an electronic The Act does not modify any statutory rule
document or electronic data message in any legal relating to the admissibility of electronic data
proceeding has the burden of proving its authenticity messages or electronic documents, except the rules
by evidence capable of supporting a finding that the relating to authentication and best evidence.
electronic data message or electronic document is In assessing the evidential weight of an
what the person claims it to be. electronic data message or electronic document, the
reliability of the manner in which it was generated,
MODES FOR ESTABLISHING INTEGRITY
QuickTime™ and a stored or communicated, the reliability of the manner
are needed to see this picture. in which its originator was identified, and other
Section 17. Method of Establishing the Integrity relevant factors shall be given due regard.
of an Electronic Document or Electronic Data
Message Section 19. Proof by Affidavit and Cross-
Examination
In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the The matters referred to in Section 12 of the Act on
integrity of the information and communication admissibility and evidentiary weight, and Section 9 of
system in which an electronic data message or the Act on the presumption of integrity of electronic
electronic document is recorded or stored may be signatures, may be presumed to have been
Page 287 of 289

established by an affidavit given to the best of the Proof of Previous Conviction

deponent’s or affiant’s personal knowledge subject to
the rights of parties in interest to cross-examine such People v. Ubongan 357SCRA 142 (2001)
deponent or affiant as a matter of right. Such right of Facts: A was charged with kidnapping and serious
cross-examination may likewise be enjoyed by a illegal detention. In the course of the trial, the
party to the proceedings who is adverse in interest to prosecution attempted to bring out A’s former
the party who has introduced the affidavit or has conviction of another crime.
caused the affidavit to be introduced. Issue: Can the proof of A’s past conviction be used
Any party to the proceedings has the right to to prove his guilt of the crime charged?
cross-examine a person referred to in Section 11, Held: No. A previous decision or judgment, while
paragraph 4, and sub-paragraph (c) of the Act. admissible in evidence, may only prove that an
accused was previously convicted of a crime. It may
RETENTION OF ELECTRONIC DATA MESSAGE AND not be used to prove that the accused is guilty of a
ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT crime charged in a subsequent case.
Section 20. Retention of Electronic Data Message

and Electronic Document Recantation
Notwithstanding any provision of law, rule or People v. Nardo 353 SCRA 339 (2001)
regulation to the contrary: Facts: A was charged with rape by his 14-year old
a. The requirement in any provision of law that daughter. He was convicted by the TC and
certain documents be retained in their sentenced to death. A raised the defense that the
original form is satisfied by retaining them in victim desisted in pursuing the case against her
the form of an electronic data message or father by showing two letters. However, these were
electronic document which: not subscribed and sworn to by the victim.
i. Remains accessible so as to be Issue: Should the letters be admitted in order to
usable for subsequent reference; acquit the accused?
ii. Is retained in the format in which it Held: No. A recantation of a testimony is
was generated, sent or received, or exceedingly unreliable for there is always the
in a format which can be probability that such recantation may later on be itself
demonstrated to accurately repudiated. Courts look with disfavor upon retractions
represent the electronic data because they can easily be obtained from witnesses
message or electronic document through intimidation or for monetary consideration. A
generated, sent or received; and, retraction does not necessarily negate an earlier
iii. Where applicable, enables the declaration. Especially, recantations made after the
identification of its originator and conviction of the accused deserve only scant
consideration. Even if sworn to, the victim’s
addressee, as well as the
recantation could hardly suffice to overturn the finding
determination of the date and the
of guilt by the TC which was based on her own clear
time it was sent or received.
and convincing testimony given during a full-blown
b. The requirement referred to in paragraph (a) trial. An affidavit of recantation, being usually taken
is satisfied by using the services of a third ex parte, would be considered inferior to the
party, provided that the conditions set forth in testimony given in open court.
subparagraphs (i), (ii) and (iii) of paragraph
(a) are met. Credibility
c. Relevant government QuickTime™ agencies
and a tasked with
enforcing or implementing
are needed to see this picture. applicable laws
relating to the retention of certain documents People v. Buenaflor 359 SCRA 783 (2001)
may, by appropriate issuances, impose Facts: RTC found A guilty for raping 14-yr. old V
regulations to ensure the integrity, reliability who was asleep at the time of the commission of the
crime. During the initial reception of evidence for the
of such documents and the proper
prosecution, V said she did not know A because it
implementation of Section 13 of the Act.
was her first time to see his face at the time the
incident took place, but later on cross-examination,
she admitted that what she said was false because
Page 288 of 289

actually A is their neighbor. The TC thought that

considering that the offended party is a very young
girl of 15 years, it is not uncommon for the young girl
to conceal the assaults because of the rapist's
threats on her life.
Issue: Whether V is a credible witness.
Held: No. In a prosecution for rape, the
complainant's credibility becomes the single most
important issue. In this case, the testimony of the
complainant is not credible because it is replete with
inconsistencies, and narrations that are contrary to
common experience, human nature and the natural
course of things.
Alibi
People v. Abendan et. al. 360 SCRA 106 (2001)

Facts: RTC found Abendan et. al. guilty of murder.
The trial court gave credence to the testimonies of
the prosecution witnesses that there was treachery
and conspiracy in the killing of the victim, who was
asleep when he was fatally shot. A argued that the
trial court erred in ignoring his alibi.
Issue: Whether the trial court was correct in not
giving weight to A’s alibi.
Held: Yes. Positive identification, where
categorical and consistent and without any showing
of ill motive on the part of the eyewitness testifying on
the matter, prevails over alibi and denial which, if not
substantiated by clear and convincing evidence, are
negative and self-serving evidence undeserving of
weight in law. Alibi becomes unworthy of credit when
it is established mainly by the accused himself and
his relative, and not by credible persons.
Medical/Chemical Evidence
People v. Nubla 358 SCRA 735 (2001)

Facts: A was convicted for the rape of V, committed
by means of force and intimidation; in particular, by
inducing V to drink iced tea laced with drugs causing
the latter to lose consciousness. A denied that V was
drugged and pointed to the absence of any medical
or chemical evidence to support her claim.
Issue: Whether the fact that V was drugged was
sufficiently proven. QuickTime™ and a
Held: Yes. While no chemical analysis was
conducted on the blood of the complainant
immediately after the incident, the physical
manifestations (dizziness, bodily weakness, strong
desire to sleep) were proved during the trial.
Page 289 of 289

Evidence Printable PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Evidence Printable PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

ATENEO CENTRAL BAR OPERATIONS 2007

¾ In quasi-judicial proceedings, the rules of

¾ In cases before the Court of Agrarian

¾ The law of evidence is fundamentally a 3. TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE – is that which is

Page 240 of 289

amount to an Section 4. Relevancy; collateral matters.

Section. 3 Admissibility of evidence.

Page 241 of 289

1. Conditional admissibility The evidence which was illegally obtained is

b. English rule – if a party has

Section 1. Judicial Notice, when mandatory

Page 242 of 289

- cognizance of certain facts which judges may take

Page 243 of 289

Page 244 of 289

Page 245 of 289

NOTE: Best evidence rule applies only when the

EXCEPTIONS: Document - is a deed, instrument or other duly

Page 246 of 289

Page 247 of 289

Even an oral demand in open court for production at

Page 248 of 289

(a) An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or PAROL EVIDENCE BEST EVIDENCE

Page 249 of 289

INTERMEDIATE AMBIGUITY – situation where an 3. The mistake should be alleged and

Page 250 of 289

Page 251 of 289

Page 252 of 289

Drunkenness does not per se disqualify a witness

When Rule Applicable

Page 253 of 289

Page 254 of 289

Page 255 of 289

THE FOLLOWING PERSONS CANNOT TESTIFY Marital Privilege

Page 256 of 289

BY REASON OF creating that relationship, they will not be covered by

Page 257 of 289

Page 258 of 289

Page 259 of 289

Page 260 of 289

Page 261 of 289

Page 262 of 289

Page 263 of 289

Page 264 of 289

The admission or declaration of an agent subsequent Section 30. Admission by conspirator

The quantum of interest of the declarant does not

Page 265 of 289

The conspiracy may be inferred from the acts of the

Page 266 of 289

The rule on admission by silence applies where a Section 33. Confession

Page 267 of 289

Page 268 of 289

Where the extrajudicial confession of the accused EXCEPTIONS:

Page 269 of 289

Page 270 of 289

Reason for its admission

Page 271 of 289

Page 272 of 289

relate to the 2. verbal acts must

EVIDENCE OF NEGATIVE GOOD REPUTE

REQUISITES Distinctions between verbal acts and

Page 273 of 289

STATEMENTS Probative value: only prima facie evidence of the