GRETCHEN CANEDO ANSWERS To Rule-130-Sections-1-to-19

NAME: Gretchen B.
Canedo DATE: 03/19/2020

SUBJECT: Evidence Review
Rule 130 Sections 1 to 19
1) After a buy-bust operation, drugs in the possession of the accused

were seized. However, the drugs were not physically inventoried
and photographed in the presence of the accused. Are the drugs
admissible in evidence?
ANSWER:
Yes. Non-compliance with the express requirements under

paragraph 1, Section 21, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 is
justified where the prosecution recognized the procedural lapses,
and, thereafter, explained the justifiable grounds, and when the
prosecution established that the integrity and evidentiary value of
the evidence seized had been preserved.
In the instant case, while the drugs were not physically inventoried
and photographed in the presence of the accused, this does not
automatically excludes the evidence obtained since the rule
provides for exceptions which if complied with can justify the
admissibility of the seized drugs.
2) At the trial of Ace for violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act, the
prosecution offers in evidence a photocopy of the marked P100 bills
used in the “buy-bust” operation. Ace objects to the introduction of
the photocopy on the ground that the Best Evidence Rule prohibits
the introduction of secondary evidence in lieu of the original.
a) Is the photocopy real (object) evidence or documentary

evidence?
ANSWER:
The photocopy of the marked bills is real (object) evidence not

documentary evidence, because the marked bills are real evidence.
b) Is the photocopy admissible in evidence?
ANSWER:
YES, the photocopy is admissible in evidence, because the best

evidence rule does not apply to object or real evidence. The best
evidence rule is inapplicable since such secondary evidence is only
intended to establish the existence of a transaction and not the
contents of the document.
3) May a private document be offered, and admitted in evidence both
as documentary evidence and as object evidence? Explain.
ANSWER:
YES. A private document may be offered and admitted in evidence

both as documentary evidence and as object evidence depending on
the purpose for which the document is offered.
Objects as evidence are those addressed to the senses of the court.

(Sec. 1, Rule 130, Rules of Court). On the other hand, documentary
evidence consists of writings or any material containing letters,
words, numbers, figures, symbols or other modes of written
expressions, offered as proof of their contents. (Sec. 2, Rule 130,
Rules of Court).
If the private documents is offered to prove its existence, conditions

or for any purpose other than the contents of a document, the same
is considered as an object evidence. When it is offered as proof of
its contents, the same is considered as documentary evidence.
Therefore, the document may be offered for both purposes under

the principle of multiple admissibility.
4) Police officers arrested Mr. Druggie in a buy-bust operation and
confiscated from him 10 sachets of shabu and several marked
genuine peso bills worth P5,000.00 used as the buy-bust money
during the buy-bust operation. At the trial of Mr. Druggie for
violation of R.A. 9165, the prosecution offered in evidence, among
others, photocopies of the confiscated marked genuine peso bills.
The photocopies were offered to prove that Mr. Druggie had

engaged at the time of his arrest in the illegal selling dangerous
drugs. Invoking the Best Evidence Rule, Atty. Maya Bang, the
defense counsel, objected to the admissibility of the photocopies of
the confiscated marked genuine peso bills.
Should the trial judge sustain the objection of the defense counsel?
Explain.
ANSWER:
NO. The marked money is an ordinary document falling under Sec.

2, Rule 130 of the Revised Rules of Court which excludes the
introduction of secondary evidence except in the five (5) instances
mentioned therein.
The best evidence rule applies only when the contents of the
document are the subject of inquiry. Where the issue is only as to
whether or not such document was actually executed, or exists, or
in the circumstances relevant to or surrounding its execution, the
best evidence rule does not apply and testimonial evidence is
admissible.
Since the aforesaid marked money was presented by the

prosecution solely for the purpose of establishing its existence and
not its contents, other substitutionary evidence, like a xerox copy
thereof, is therefore admissible without the need of accounting for
the original.
Moreover, the presentation at the trial of the "buy-bust money" was

not indispensable to the conviction of the accused-appellant
because the sale of the marijuana had been adequately proved by
the testimony of the police officers. So long as the marijuana
actually sold by the accused-appellant had been submitted as an
exhibit, the failure to produce the marked money itself would not
constitute a fatal omission.
5) When X loaned a sum of money to Y, the former typed a single copy
of the promissory note, which they both signed. X made two
photocopies of the promissory note, giving one copy to Y and
retaining the other copy. X entrusted the typewritten copy to his
counsel for safekeeping. The copy with X’s counsel was destroyed
when the law office was burned by Z.
In an action to collect the promissory note, which is deemed to be

the “original” copy, can the photocopies in the hands of the parties
be considered as “duplicate” originals?
ANSWER:
Pursuant to Sec. 4 [b] of Rule 130, the copy that was signed and
lost is the only "original" copy for purposes of the Best Evidence
Rule.
Moreover, the photocopies are not duplicate original copies because

based on Sec. 5 of Rule 130, they constitute secondary evidence.
6) Can best evidence rule be waived? Discuss using jurisprudence.
ANSWER:
YES. In the case of Lorenzana v. Lelina (GR. No. 187850, August

17, 2016), the Supreme Court held that the best evidence rule
requires that when the subject of inquiry is the contents of a
document, no evidence is admissible other than the original
document itself except in the instances mentioned in Section 3, Rule
130 of the Revised Rules of Court. As such, mere photocopies of
documents are inadmissible pursuant to the best evidence rule.
Evidence not objected to is deemed admitted and may be validly

considered by the court in arriving at its judgment. Courts are not
precluded to accept in evidence a mere photocopy of a document
when no objection was raised when it was formally offered
Moreover, grounds for objection must be specified in any case.

Grounds for objections not raised at the proper time shall be
considered waived, even if the evidence was objected to on some
other ground. Thus, even on appeal, the appellate court may not
consider any other ground of objection, except those that were
raised at the proper time.
The best evidence rule requires that when the subject of inquiry is
the contents of a document, no evidence is admissible other than
the original document itself except in the instances mentioned in
Section 3, Rule 130 of the Revised Rules of Court. As such, mere
photocopies of documents are inadmissible pursuant to the best
evidence rule.
7) What are the two (2) things to be established for parol evidence to
be admitted? Discuss using jurisprudence.
ANSWER:
In Philippine National Railways v. Court of First Instance of Albay,

83 SCRA 569 (1978), the Supreme Court noted that “if the
defendant set up the affirmative defense that the contract
mentioned in the complaint does not express the true agreement of
the parties, then parol evidence is admissible to prove the true
agreement of the parties.”
Moreover, as with all possible objections to the admission of

evidence, a party’s failure to timely object is deemed a waiver, and
parol evidence may then be entertained. Apart from pleading these
exceptions, it is equally imperative that the parol evidence sought
to be introduced points to the conclusion proposed by the party
presenting it. That is, it must be relevant, tending to “induce belief
in the existence” of the flaw, true intent, or subsequent extraneous
terms averred by the party seeking to introduce parol evidence.
In sum, two (2) things must be established for parol evidence to be

admitted:
First, that the existence of any of the four (4) exceptions has
been put in issue in a party’s pleading or has not been
objected to by the adverse party; and
Second, that the parol evidence sought to be presented

serves to form the basis of the conclusion proposed by the
presenting party.
8) Distinguish best evidence rule from parol evidence rule.
ANSWER:
The Best Evidence Rule provides that when the subject of the
inquiry is the contents of the document, no evidence shall be
admissible other than the original document itself (Sec. 3, Rule
130). Further, this Rule is adopted for the prevention of fraud and is
declared to be essential to the pure administration of justice. If a
party is in possession of such evidence and withholds it, the
presumption naturally arises that the better evidence is withheld for
fraudulent purposes.
On the other hand, Parol Evidence provides that when the terms of
an agreement have been reduced to writing, it is considered as
containing all the terms agreed upon and there can be, between the
parties and their successors-in-interest, no evidence of such terms
other than the contents of the written agreement (Sec. 9, Rule
130). Moreover, it is designed to give certainty to a transaction
which has been reduced to writing, because written evidence is
much more certain and accurate than that which rests on fleeting
memory only.
9) In a collection case, plaintiff introduced in evidence a receipt which
states:
“Received the amount of Thirty Five Thousand Pesos

(P35,000.00) cash from Rodrigo Quiambao and Conrado Salonga on
the day of May 4, 1982.
Sgd. Lucio Cruz
Defendant in his answer denied having contracted any loan from

plaintiff claiming that the amount was received by him as
consideration for their “pakyaw” agreement and payment for the
sublease of a fishpond. He added that it was plaintiff who owed him
money since the latter still had unpaid rentals for the 10-month
period that he actually occupied the fishpond.
Can the trial court receive oral evidence to alter or modify the
contents of the receipt without violating the parol evidence rule?
ANSWER:
YES. Sec. 7, Rule 130 is predicated on the existence of a document

embodying the terms of an agreement. The reason for the rule is
the presumption that when the parties have reduced their
agreement to writing they have made such writing the only
repository and memorial of the truth, and whatever is not found in
the writing must be understood to have been waived or abandoned.
The rule, however, is not applicable in the case at bar. Section 7,

Rule 130 is predicated on the existence of a document embodying
the terms of an agreement, but the receipt above does not contain
such an agreement. It is only a receipt attesting to the fact that on
May 4,1982, the petitioner received from the private respondent the
amount of P35,000. It is not and could have not been intended by
the parties to be the sole memorial of their agreement. As a matter
of fact, the receipt does not even mention the transaction that gave
rise to its issuance. At most, it can only be considered a casual
memorandum of a transaction between the parties and an
acknowledgment of the receipt of money executed by the petitioner
for the private respondent's satisfaction. A writing of this nature, is
not covered by the parol evidence rule.
A receipt is merely a written admission of a transaction

independently existing, and, like other admissions, is not
conclusive.
10) Give at least five (5) rules on interpretation of documents.
ANSWER:
The following are Rules on Interpretation of Documents:
Sec. 10 . Interpretation of a writing according to its legal

meaning. — The language of a writing is to be interpreted
according to the legal meaning it bears in the place of its execution,
unless the parties intended otherwise.
Sec. 11 . Instrument construed so as to give effect to all

provisions. — In the construction of an instrument, where there
are several provisions or particulars, such a construction is, if
possible, to be adopted as will give effect to all.
Sec. 12 . Interpretation according to intention; general and

particular provisions. — In the construction of an instrument, the
intention of the parties is to be pursued; and when a general and a
particular provision are inconsistent, the latter is paramount to the
former. So a particular intent will control a general one that is
inconsistent with it.
Sec. 13 . Interpretation according to circumstances. — For

the proper construction of an instrument, the circumstances under
which it was made, including the situation of the subject thereof
and of the parties to it, may be shown, so that the judge may be
placed in the position of those who language he is to interpret.
Sec. 14 . Peculiar signification of terms. — The terms of a

writing are presumed to have been used in their primary and
general acceptation, but evidence is admissible to show that they
have a local, technical, or otherwise peculiar signification, and were
so used and understood in the particular instance, in which case the
agreement must be construed accordingly.

GRETCHEN CANEDO ANSWERS To Rule-130-Sections-1-to-19

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GRETCHEN CANEDO ANSWERS To Rule-130-Sections-1-to-19

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

GRETCHEN CANEDO ANSWERS To Rule-130-Sections-1-to-19

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NAME: Gretchen B.

Canedo DATE: 03/19/2020

Rule 130 Sections 1 to 19

1) After a buy-bust operation, drugs in the possession of the accused

Yes. Non-compliance with the express requirements under

a) Is the photocopy real (object) evidence or documentary

The photocopy of the marked bills is real (object) evidence not

b) Is the photocopy admissible in evidence?

YES, the photocopy is admissible in evidence, because the best

YES. A private document may be offered and admitted in evidence

Objects as evidence are those addressed to the senses of the court.

If the private documents is offered to prove its existence, conditions

Therefore, the document may be offered for both purposes under

The photocopies were offered to prove that Mr. Druggie had

NO. The marked money is an ordinary document falling under Sec.

Since the aforesaid marked money was presented by the

Moreover, the presentation at the trial of the "buy-bust money" was

In an action to collect the promissory note, which is deemed to be

Moreover, the photocopies are not duplicate original copies because

YES. In the case of Lorenzana v. Lelina (GR. No. 187850, August

Evidence not objected to is deemed admitted and may be validly

Moreover, grounds for objection must be specified in any case.

In Philippine National Railways v. Court of First Instance of Albay,

Moreover, as with all possible objections to the admission of

In sum, two (2) things must be established for parol evidence to be

Second, that the parol evidence sought to be presented

“Received the amount of Thirty Five Thousand Pesos

Sgd. Lucio Cruz

Defendant in his answer denied having contracted any loan from

YES. Sec. 7, Rule 130 is predicated on the existence of a document

The rule, however, is not applicable in the case at bar. Section 7,

A receipt is merely a written admission of a transaction

The following are Rules on Interpretation of Documents:

Sec. 10 . Interpretation of a writing according to its legal

Sec. 11 . Instrument construed so as to give effect to all

Sec. 12 . Interpretation according to intention; general and

Sec. 13 . Interpretation according to circumstances. — For

Sec. 14 . Peculiar signification of terms. — The terms of a

You might also like