L Admtssiblitv of E{riderce

A. Rule 128, secs. 1-4

1. Reyesv. CourtofAppeals 216 SCRA 2s {1ee3}
2. People v. T\rrco 337 SCRA 714 {2OO0}
B. Relevance:
1. Sections 3 & 4, Rule 128
2- Bautista v. Aperece 51 O.c. Bo5 (19e5)
3. State v. BaIl 3se s.wzd 783 (i960)
C. Competence:
1. Section 3, Rule 128.
2. Brclusionaqr Rules Uader the 1987 Constitution, e"g.,
(a) Sections 2 and 3, Art. III
(b! Section 12, Art, IIl
(c) Secfion 17, Art. m
3. Statutory Rules of f)xclusion! e.9,,
(al Section 201, Tax Reform Act of 1997
(b) R.A. 1405, Law on Secrery of Elank Deposits
(c) R.A. 42OO, otherwiselo:ourr as the Wiretappirrg Act
i) Ganaan v. IAC 145 SCRA 112 {1e86}
n) Salcedo-Ortariezv, CA 235 SCRA tll {1994}
n, Ramirezv. CA 248 SCRA S9O (1995)

n. What Necd Not Ee Proved

A. Rule 129, Sem. 1-4; Ruie 10, Sec. I
E" Cam:
1- &dicial lCstice
{a} Cig of hfianihv. &arcia 19 SeREr+13 {1967}
(b! Eaguirovs- Vda. de Jalag*t 42 SCRA 337 {1971i
(c] Prietov. Armyo 14 SCRA 549 {1965}
{d} Yao-Kee v. S5r-Goazales 167 SCRA 736 (1988)
tel Tabuena v. CA 196 SCR{ 650 (199i}
(il People v. Godcry 250 SCRA 676 [199s)
td BPl-Savings v, C'iA s30 scRA 507 (2000)
2. Judicial Admissions
{a) Lucido v. Ca}upitan 27 Phii.48 {1e14)
ib) Torres v. CA 131 SCRA 24 119841

EI. Real and Demonstrafiql Evldencc

A. Itule 130; Sec. 1; Sec.2
B. Cases:
1. Sisonv. People 2so scRA 58 (1ee5)
2. Adamczukv. Holloway 13 A.2d 2 {1940)
3. Statev. Tatum 360 P.2d 754 {1961)

tV. Ecst Hdence RuIe

A. Ruie 13O, Secs. 2-8; Rule 132, Secs. 25 and. 27; Electrorric Ccmmerce Act [R.A,
8792), Secs.5,6-15; Rules on Eeckorric Evidence {'REEJ,Ruie 2, Sec.l; Rule 3;
Rule 4.
B. Cases:
1. AirFrance v. Carrascoso i8 scRA 155 1966)
2. Meyers v. United States 771F.2d B0O (1948)
3. Peoplev. Tan 105 PhiI. 1242 t19591
4. Seiler v. Lucas Film, Ltd. 797 F.zd 1504 (19&6)
 Peopie vs. Tandoy 192 SCRA e8 (lSeO)
6. U.S. v, Gregorio 17 Phil. 522 (1910)
7. Fiscal of Pampangav. Reyes s5 Phn 90s t1e31)
8. Vda. de Corpus v. Brabangco {C.A.i 59 O.G. 8262 t1963}
9. Compania Maritima v. Allied Free WorkersTT SCRA 24 (1977)
10. Villa Rey Transit v- Ferrer 2s scRA 84s {1968}
11. Michael & Co. v. Enriquez 3s Phil. 87 (19ls)
12. De Vera v. Aguilar 218 SCRA 602 (1e8s)
t.). NaPoCorv. Codilla G.R- No. 170491, April 4, 2007
14. MCC Industrial Sales Vs. Sanryong 536 SCRA 418 (2007)

V, Psrole Evldcace Rule

A, Rule 13O, Sec. 9; Art. 14O3, Civil Code.

B, Cases:
i. Enriquezv. Ramos 6 SCRA 2t9 lle62l
2. Canuto v. Mariano s7 Phil. 840 {1e18}
3. YuTekv. Gonzales 29 Phil. 384 {1e15}
4. Land Settlement & Dev. Corp. v.
Garcla Plantation 7SCRA750 {1963)
5. Maulini v. Serrano 28 phil. 640 {1914}
6. PNBv, Seeto 91 Phi1. 756 (1952)
7. Woodhouse v. Helili s3 PhiL 526 {i95s)
8. Robles v. lizarrag:a 50 Phil. 387 (19271
9. Cnrzv- CA 192 SCRA 209 {1990}
1O- Lwhugasv. CA 143 SCRA 335 {1985}
tt- _ trnciryagw- C& '}57WSS?E(r@63
ng- Sr'*srmeev" C,A ffiscRA56r {nsq?}

VI. Irtem tatton ofllrcumcutr

A. Rule 130, Secs. 10-19; Arts, 1370-i379, Civil Code

Cases:
1, l,ambert v. Fox 26 Phil. 588 (1914)
2. Capita-l Insurance v, Sadang 21 SCRA 1183 (1967)

Vll, Ouall8cadoaa of 'lPlt+ersce

Mental hcapaciry or lrnmatrrig,

1. Rule 13O. Secs. 20 & 21
2. People v. De Jesus 129 SCRA4 {1984}
3. People v. Sa-Iomon 229 SCRA 402 {1993)
4. People v. Mendoza 254 SCRA 18 (1996)
B. Spousal Immurrity
1. Rule 13O, Section22
2. Peoplev. Castaneda 88 SCRA 562 (i97e)
3. People v, Francisco 78 Phil. 694 t1947|
4. l-ezarnav. Rodriguez 23SCRA 1166{196E}
5. Alvarez vs. Ramirez 473 SCRA 72 pAOSl
C. Dead Man's Statute
1. Rule 130, Section 23
2. Guerrero v. St. Claire's Real$r & Co. 124 SCRA s53 i1983)
3. Abrahamv.Rectc-I(asten 4 SCRA 298 (19621
+. Gofriv, CA 144 SCRA 222 {1e861
5. Tongco v. Vianeon 50 Phir. 698 {7927}
6. Lichauco v. Atlantic Gulf 84 Phil.sso (1949i
7- Razon v. IAC 207 SCRA 234 tt992t

vrur. PrivileEcd ComounicatCons