JARA RECITATION NOTES FOR EVIDENCE NO.

When a party raises an affirmative defense, he in effect, hypothetically admits the

material allegations of his opponent in his pleadings.
PRELIMINARY MATTERS
In a case where a party defaults, is there still a need to present evidence?
What is Evidence?
YES. The court should still require the non-defaulting party to present his evidence.
Evidence is the means, sanctioned by these rules, of ascertaining in a judicial There is still a need to prove the allegations made in the complaint.
proceeding the truth respecting a matter of fact.
In every case that requires adjudication, is there a need to present evidence at
Can Evidence be used to answer questions of fact? How about questions of law? all times?
As provided for by the definition, Evidence can be used to answer ONLY questions of No. There are instances when Evidence is not required to be presented such as the
fact, and not questions of law. following:
Why cannot we use Evidence to answer disputes of law? 1. When no factual issue exists in a case.
2. Where the case presents only a question of law.
Under our legal system, it is conclusively presumed that everybody knows the law. 3. When the pleadings in a civil case do not tender an issue of fact.
Ignoratia legis non-excusat. All parties to the dispute must know the law applicable in 4. Evidence may also be dispensed with by agreement of the parties.
the case. There could be o dispute between the parties and even the court itself 5. Matters of judicial notice (See Rule 129).
concerning the truth about a matter of law. 6. Matters judicially admitted (See Rule 129).
Distinguish Questions of Fact from Questions of Law
Are evidentiary rules also found outside Rules 128-133?
Question of fact (also known as a point of fact) is a question which must be answered
by reference to facts and evidence, and inferences arising from those facts. On the YES.
other hand, a question of law is a question which must be answered by applying
relevant legal principles, by an interpretation of the law. Illustration?
Is the issue on jurisdiction a question of fact or law? Note: Example ni Jara ito. Supposing in a complaint for sum of money, the plaintiff
alleges that the defendant is indebted to him for P10 million pesos. Upon the
It is a question of law. Jurisdiction pertains to the power of the Courts to decide presentation of evidence, the plaintiff presents to the court a promissory note
cases. It is vested by substantive law. Any issue relating to it is a legal question. evidencing the indebtedness of the defendant. The note however indicates that such
indebtedness amounts to P30 million pesos. May the court admit aforementioned
When does a question of fact arise? evidence even if the original complaint only alleged P10 million? YES. Under Sec. 5,
Rule 10 (Amendment to conform or to authorize presentation of evidence). You see,
When the issues are already joined. this is an evidentiary rule outside Rules 128-133 (This was a total mind-fuck. Please
take note of this example of his).
When does that joinder happen?
What is Factum Probandum and Factum Probans?
Upon the filing of an answer which contains a specific denial as to the existence of a
certain fact. Factum probandum is the ultimate fact or the fact sought to be established. Factum
Define a specific denial. Probans pertains to the evidentiary fact or the facts by which the Probandum is
established. The former refers to the proposition, while the latter refers to the
It refers to a denial of the material facts or facts alleged in the pleading of the claimant materials which establish that proposition.
essential to his cause of action.
Does probandum exist in a case where a party defaults?
A defendant must specify each material allegation of fact the truth of which he does
not admit and, whenever practicable, shall set forth the substance of the matters YES. Party still needs to present evidence ex-parte.
upon which he relies to support his denial. Where a defendant desires to deny only a
part of an averment, he shall specify so much of it as is true and material and shall A prosecutor files in the court an information for homicide. Is there probandum
deny only the remainder. Where a defendant is without knowledge or information already?
sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of a material averment made to the
complaint, he shall so state, and this shall have the effect of a denial. (Sec.10, Rule 8) NO. Because the accused has yet to be arraigned. In criminal cases, the arraignment
of the accused determines whether or not there exists a probandum.
Can there be a question of fact when a party raises an affirmative defense?
If the accused pleads guilty to a crime, does that negate the existence of
probandum?
 3. Testimonial: submitted to the court through the testimony or the depositon of
Not in all instances. Probandum is still necessary when the case involves a heinous a witness.
crime.
As to ability to establish a fact in dispute:
True or False. Probandum is always determined by the allegations in the
pleadings. 1. Direct: proves a fact in dispute without any aid of any inference or
presumption.
FALSE. Probandum may also be determined by the pre-trial order and it may change 2. Circumstantial: proof of fact or facts which taken singly or collectively, the
during the course of the trial (see Sec. 5, Rule 10). existence of a fact in dispute may be inferred as a necessary or a probable
consequence.
Can probandum change easily in a criminal case?
As to Probative Value:
No. probandum cannot be changed the same way it can be changed in a criminal
case. There is a necessity to amend the pleadings according to the Rules on Criminal 1. Prima Facie: that which standing alone unexplained, is sufficient to establish
Procedure. the proposition affirmed.
2. Conclusive: Evidence which is incontrovertible.
When do we apply the Rules on Evidence? 3. Corroborative: additional evidence of a different kind and character from that
already given tending to prove the same point.
The rules of evidence, being part of the Rules of Court, apply only to judicial 4. Cumulative: additional evidence of the same kind and character proving the
proceedings, subject to inapplicable cases in Sec. 4, Rule 128. same fact.
Can we apply evidence in Summary Proceedings? As to weight and acceptability:
Yes. Summary proceedings partake the nature of judicial proceedings. Being the case, 1. Primary: evidence which affords the greatest certainty of the fact in question.
we can definitely apply the Rules on Evidence in such. 2. Secondary: evidence which is inferior to primary evidence.
Do we present Evidence in Summary Proceedings? If so, what then is our
evidence? As to Quality:
YES. Evidence is still presented by virtue of the pleadings and affidavits submitted 1. Relevant
before the court. They partake the nature of documentary evidence and they serve to 2. Material
prove an issue of fact provided that they are admissible pursuant to law. 3. Admissible
4. Credible
How about in Quasi-Judicial Proceedings? 5. Competent
Yes. The same apply by analogy whenever practicable and convenient except where What are the Axioms of Admissibility?
the governing law on that particular proceeding specifically adopts the rules of
evidence in the Rules of Court. Axiom of Relevance: None but the facts having a rational probative value are
admissible.
Distinguish Proof from Evidence.
Axiom of Competence: Facts having a rational probative value are admissible unless
Proof is not the evidence itself. There is proof only because of evidence. It is merely the some specific rule prohibits their admission.
probative effect of evidence and is the conviction or persuasion of the mind resulting
from a consideration of evidence. On the other hand, Evidence is the medium by What are the different classes of admissibility according to jurisprudence?
which a fact is proved or disproved.
1. Multiple Admissibility of Evidence – where the evidence is relevant and
What are the different classifications of evidence? competent for two or more purposes, such evidence may be admitted for any or all
purposes which it is offered provided it satisfies all the requirements of law for the
According to Form: admissibility therefor.
2. Conditional Admissibility of Evidence – where evidence initially offered appears
1. Object: evidence that is directly addressed to the senses of the court and to be immaterial or irrelevant unless it is connected with facts to be subsequently
consists of tangible things exhibited or demonstrated in open court, in an ocular proved, such evidence may be admitted under the condition that the subsequent facts
inspection, or in a designated place. shall be proven; otherwise, they shall be stricken out from the record.
2. Documentary: evidence supplied by written instruments or derived from 3. Curative Admissibility of Evidence – Where improper evidence was admitted
conventional symbols, such as letters, by which ideas are represented on material against the opposition of another party, he may be allowed to contradict it with
substances. similar improper evidence.
 WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVEN The general rule is that the foreign law must still be proven as a matter of fact.
However, in the case of PCIB vs. Escolin, the Supreme Court held that where the
What are some matters that do not require any evidence? foreign law is within the actual knowledge of the court such as when the law is
generally well known, had been ruled upon in previous cases before it and none of the
N 1. Where no factual issue exists in a case. parties claim otherwise, the court may take judicial notice of the foreign law. In
L 2. Where the case presents only a question of law. essence, the Escolin case gives the requisites for the exception:
3. When the pleadings in a civil case do not tender an issue of fact.
P 4. When there is an agreement made by the parties (usually done in the pre- 1. Actual knowledge by the Court; S
A trial). 2. Foreign law is generally well known;
A
J 5. When courts have taken judicial notice of such matters. 3. Stipulation by the parties. W
What do you mean by Judicial Notice? What if the foreign law is Common Law? How do you prove such creature?
It is the cognizance of certain facts which judges may properly take and act upon Common law (also known as case law or precedent) is law developed by judges
without proof. through decisions of courts and similar tribunals (as opposed to statutes adopted
through the legislative process or regulations issued by the executive branch). You
Why? I thought facts must be proven in court? prove such by getting a copy of the foreign court’s decision and having the same
certified in the like manner as you certify foreign statutes.
Yes. That is the general rule. However, there are some matters, on the basis of
expediency and convenience, which do not require proof. The need for evidence is set Is Judicial Notice absolute according to the Rules?
aside by the rules.
No. There are some matters that require hearing before courts can take judicial
What are matters subject of Judicial Notice? notice.
1. Existence and territorial extent of states; When does it require hearing?
2. Political history, forms of government, and symbols of nationality;
3. Law of nations 1. During trial, the court, on its own initiative, or on request of a party, may
4. Admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their seals; announce its intention to take judicial notice of any matter and allow the parties to be
5. Political constitution and history of the Philippines; heard thereon.
6. Official acts of the legislative, executive, and judicial departments of the 2. After the trial, and before judgment or on appeal, the court may take judicial
Philippines; notice of any matter and allow the parties to be heard thereon if such matter is
7. Laws of nature; decisive of a material issue in the case.
8. Measure of time; and
9. Geographical divisions. What are Judicial Admissions?
What is the doctrine of Processual Presumption? It is an admission, verbal or written, made by a party in the course of the proceedings.
The foreign law, whenever applicable, should be proved by the proponent thereof, Note: for an extensive discussion on admissions, please see the memory aid.
otherwise, such law shall be presumed to be exactly the same as the law of the forum.
Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
Is it not the duty of the Courts to apply the Local Law?
May a complaint contain a judicial admission?
It is. However, there are certain transactions and legal acts that are bound by laws of
foreign jurisdictions. It is important that courts respect the governing laws over such Yes, if there is an allegation that is contrary to the interests of the complainant. In
acts. However, the existence of such laws must be proven as a matter of fact. evidence, such admission must be DISADVANTAGEOUS to the one who made the
complaint (Jara statement).
How do you then prove foreign law?
Are admissions made by a counsel binding upon his client?
As for foreign statutes and issuances, you prove the foreign law through acquiring a
copy of the said document which is certified by the agent of the said country through Generally, Yes. Unless of course the lawyer was patently stupid.
the DFA (As per Jara’s lecture, get a copy of the law abroad or in the embassy, have it
certified through a consul, ambassador, or a foreign public official, and para sigurado, Note: The function of the rule that negligence or mistake of counsel in procedure is
idaan mo na din sa DFA). imputed to and binding upon the client, as any other procedural rule, is to serve as
an instrument to advance the ends of justice. When in the circumstances of each case
Do we still need certification that the said foreign law exists even though the the rule desert[s] its proper office as an aid to justice and becomes its great hindrance
existence of such has been stipulated by both parties? and chief enemy, its rigors must be relaxed to admit exceptions thereto and to prevent
a manifest miscarriage of justice.
 No. The self-serving rule which prohibits the admission or declaration of a witness in
The court has the power to except a particular case from the operation of the rule his favor applies only to extra-judicial admissions.
whenever the purposes of justice require it [Aguilar v. CA, 320 Phil. 456 (1995)].
Self-serving statements, even if made in the complaint, are admissible because the
What if because of the stupidity of the lawyer, he made a general denial of all the claimant or the witness making it may be cross-examined on such statements.
allegations? However, whether it will be credible or not, is a matter of appreciation on the part of
the court.
Normally, the case would be ripe for judgment on the merits. However, the client may
still amend his pleading as a matter of right especially if there is no reply yet. What was the case of Prats vs. Phoenix?
Facts: This action was instituted in the Court of First Instance of the City of Manila by
Usually in cases where there is an amendment of pleadings, a judicial admission Prats & Co., a mercantile partnership, for the purpose of recovering from the Phoenix
is transformed into an extrajudicial admission. Will the same hold true in the Insurance Co., of Hartford, Connecticut, the sum of P117,800.60, with interest, by
problem above? reason of a loss alleged to have been sustained by the plaintiff, on August 21, 1924,
from a fire, it being alleged that said loss was covered by policy of insurance No.
Yes. Party must then raise such admissions as evidence. 600217, for the sum of P200,000, issued by the defendant company to the plaintiff.
For answer, the defendant, Pheonix Insurance Co., admitted the insurance of the
What happens to the judicial admissions contained in the pleadings which are policy of insurance but, by way of special defense, alleged, among other things, that
subsequently amended? the fire in question had been set by the plaintiff, or with its connivance, and that the
plaintiff had submitted under oath to the defendant a fraudulent claim of loss, in
An amended pleading supersedes the pleading that it amends. However, admissions contravention of the express terms of the policy.
in superseded pleadings may be received in evidence against the pleader; and claims The trial of the case covered a period of almost two years, in which fifty separate
or defenses alleged therein not incorporated in the amended pleading shall be deemed sessions were held, without counting the numeruos hearings upon the taking of the
waived (Sec.8, Rule 10). Such admissions, however, are considered extra-judicial deposition of Francisco Prats, a partner in the plaintiff firm, whose testimony was
admissions. Having been amended, the original complaint lost its character as a taken at the instance of the defendant. Taken all together, the time thus consumed
judicial admission, which would have required no proof, and became merely an was out of all proportion to the difficulties of the case. An examination of the
extrajudicial admission, the admissibility of which, as evidence, required its formal voluminous transcript reveals at least part of the reason for this inordinate
offer (Torres vs. CA, L-37420-21, July 31, 1984). consumption of time; since we find that far too much of the space in the transcript is
taken up with the record of petty skirmishes in court resulting from objections over
In appealed cases, may there be a verbal judicial admission? the admission of evidence.
Yes. In cases for a petition for new trial. Issue: WON the technical rules of evidence may be relaxed in admitting evidence.
What the doctrine of adoptive admission? Held: Yes. In the course of long experience we have observed that justice is most
effectivly and expenditiously administered in the courts where trivial objections to the
An adoptive admission is a party‘s reaction to a statement or action by another person admission of proof are received with least favor. The practice of excluding evidence on
when it is reasonable to treat the party‘s reaction as an admission of something stated doubtful objection to its materiality or technical objection to the form of the questions
or implied by the other person (Estrada v. Desierto, G.R. Nos. 146710-15). In this should be avoided. In a case of any intricacy it is impossible for a judge of first
case, Estrada‘s admission of his resignation as President was based on the diary of instance, in the early stages of the development of the proof, to know with any
Angara. certainty whether testimony is relevant or not; and where there is no indication of bad
faith on the part of the attorney offering the evidence, the court may as a rule safely
Supposing evidence was presented tending to prove a substantially different accept the testimony upon the statement of the attorney that the proof offered will be
(usually greater) claim which was not subject of a previous admission by the connected later. Moreover, it must be remembered that in the heat of the battle over
adverse party during the pre-trial, may the court admit such evidence? which he presides a judge of first instance may possibly fall into error in judging of
the relevancy of proof where a fair and logical connection is in fact shown. When such
YES. Rule 10, Sec. 5. a mistake is made and the proof is erroneously ruled out, the Supreme Court, upon
appeal, often finds itself embarrassed and possibly unable to correct the effects of
error without returning the case for a new trial, -- a step which this court is always
Does information contain admissions in so far as People of the Philippines are very loath to take. On the other hand, the admission of proof in a court of first
concerned? instance, even if the question as to its form, materiality, or relevancy is doubtful, can
No. never result in much harm to either litigant, because the trial judge is supposed to
know the law; and it is its duty, upon final consideration of the case, to distinguish
Is there a need to wait for a response? the relevant and material from the irrelevant and immaterial. If this course is followed
No. and the cause is prosecuted to the Supreme Court upon appeal, this court then has
all the material before it necessary to make a correct judgment.
Is there a need for a judicial admission to be prejudicial to the admitter?
In this connection it should be remembered that many of the technical rules of
evidence which are often invoked in our courts were originally worked out in England 1. The exhibition of such object is contrary to public policy, morals or decency;
and the United States, where the jury system prevails. These rules were adopted for 2. Observation of such evidence in an ocular inspection would result in delays,
the purpose of keeping matter from juries which - it was supposed - might unduly inconvenience, unnecessary expenses out of proportion to the evidentiary value of
influence them in deciding on the facts. They have little pertinence to a system of such object;
procedure, like ours, in which the court is judge both of law and facts, and in which 3. Such object evidence would be misleading or confusing;
accordingly it is necessary for the court to know what the proof is before it rules upon 4. The testimonial or documentary evidence already presented in curt already
the propriety of receiving it. Apart from these considerations is the circumstance portrays the object in question as to render a view thereof unnecessary.
mentioned above that the time consumed in the trial on such collateral points is 5. Those evidence acquired through illegal searches and seizures.
generally many times greater than would be consumed if the questionable testimony
should be admitted for what it is worth. What has been said above finds special What do you call to those evidence acquired through unlawful searches and
relevancy in this case in view of the action of the trial court in refusing to consider the seizures?
proof referred to in the opinion showing that the plaintiff, while engaged in assembling
its stock, procured maritime insurance upon a fictitious importation of silk. We Derivative Evidence.
earnestly commend the maintenance of liberal practice in the admission of proof.
Our examination of the case leads to the conclusion that the result reached by the What are the categories of Object Evidence?
trial court was correct.
1. Unique – objects that have readily identifiable marks.
What happened in the case of Maceda? 2. Objects made unique – objects that are readily made identifiable.
3. Non-unique – objects with no identifying marks and cannot be marked.
Facts: This is a criminal action for slight slander instituted in the justice of the peace
court of Pasig, Rizal, against defendants Generoso Maceda and Corazon Maceda and
which was dismissed on the ground that the offense had already prescribed. The How does the court conduct an ocular inspection?
offense was allegedly committed on July 21, 1940, and the action was filed on October
22, 1940, that is three months and one day after the supposed commission thereof. The court goes to the place where the object evidence is located, whenever the said
The private attorney for the offended party made an admission to the effect that no object cannot be brought to the chambers of the court because it is an immovable or
damages had been sustained by the latter. moving such object would cause undue inconvenience.
Issue: WON the offended party may be bound by the admission of his attorney. Is ocular inspection part of the judicial proceedings?
Held: In the instant case, the supposed admission is denied. Besides, no attorney can Yes. It is part of the trial. Inasmuch as evidence is thereby being received, such
waive his client's cause of action unless with the consent of the client, and, in the inspection should be made in the presence of the parties or at least with previous
instance case, the admission attributed to the private prosecuting attorney is not notice to them of the time and place set for the view.
alleged to have been made with the offended party's consent.
Is the judge always needed to be present in the ocular inspection?
OBJECT EVIDENCE
No. There are certain evidence-gathering procedures that do not require the presence
What is Object Evidence? of the judge such as those proceedings conducted by commissioners.
Objects as evidence are those addressed to the senses of the court. Can there be a practical mechanism to allow the inspection while dispensing the
Are there other terms for object evidence? need for the presence of the judge?
1. Real I just answered your question bitch.
2. Physical
3. Demonstrative What is the case of US vs. Tegrado?
4. Autoptic preference.
A colt valued at P34 was stolen from Valeriano Blanca. It was subsequently found in
Are there rules on exclusion for object evidence? the possession of Agapito Partolan. The latter testified that he bought the animal from
Zacarias Tegrado, the accused. The accused, however, claimed that the colt was
Section 1 of Rule 130 provides that when an object is relevant to the fact in issue, it raised from a mare belonging to him and then sold to Partolan. Identification of the
may be exhibited to, examined or viewed by the court. colt to determine if its mother was a mare belonging to the complainant Valeriano
Blana or if its mother was a mare belonging to the accused Zacarias Tegrado is,
Aside from being Relevant? therefore, the determining factor.
Generally, there could be no rules for the exclusion of object evidence. The colt was identified by a number of witnesses as the property of Blanca. Other
witnesses testified to having seen the colt following a mare belonging to the accused.
Are there exceptions? Whom shall we believe? We could, of course, rest our conclusion on the findings of the
trial court. We could, in addition, point out grave discripancies in the testimony of the claims it to be. This would ideally cover the testimony about every link in the chain,
witnesses for the defense, which argues against its reliability. But there was present from seizure of the prohibited drug up to the time it is offered in evidence, in such a
as in interested, spectator, another witnesses, who, without being sworn, could tell way that everyone who touched the exhibit would describe how and from whom it was
the truth and nothing but the truth. This was the colt. The colt was separated from received, to include, as much as possible, a description of the condition in which it
the mare of the complaining witness and turned loose; it at once went back to this was delivered to the next link in the chain.
mare. The colt was then taken to the mare of the accused; but showed its dislike for
the mare and tried to find the mare of the complaining witness. Another colt was What was the object evidence in the case of Gutierrez?
placed near the mare of the complaining witness; thereupon the mare and that colt
both resisted. This was a practical demonstration worthy of a Solomon by which the The seized drugs.
colt was able to testify by manifesting all the signs of the young, whether human or
not, on finding a long lost mother. What is the Doctrine of the Chain of Custody?
In the case of Tegrado, why did the court gave reference to King Solomon? Chain of Custody means the duly recorded authorized movements and custody of
seized drugs or controlled chemicals or plant sources of dangerous drugs or
A Solomonic approach was done in the case of Tegrado because of the way the court laboratory equipment of each stage, from the time of seizure/confiscation to receipt in
arrived with a proof – through the use of demonstrative evidence, in observing the the forensic laboratory to safekeeping to presentation in court for destruction. Such
demeanor of the horse in order to determine its true owner. record of movements and custody of seized item shall include the identity and
signature of the person who held temporary custody of the seized item, the date and
What was the object evidence in Tegrado? time when such transfer of custody were made in the course of safekeeping and used
in court as evidence, and the final disposition (Section 1, DDB Regulation No. 1,
The court observed the horse and its demeanor. Series of 2002).
What happened in the case of People vs. Gutierrez? How is the process conducted?
At around 4:45 p.m. on September 12, 2002, the police station of Ramos, Tarlac Under Sec. 21 of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Acts of 2002:
acting on a tip regarding a shabu transaction (drug-pushing) taking place somewhere
in Purok Jasmin, Poblacion Norte, dispatched a three-man team composed of PO3 1. The apprehending team having initial custody and control of the drugs shall,
Romeo Credo, P/Insp. Napoleon Dumlao, and SPO1 Restituto Fernandez to the place immediately after seizure and confiscation, physically inventory and photograph the
mentioned. Arriving at the target area, the three noticed Fernando and one Dennis same in the presence of the accused or the person/s from whom such items were
Cortez under a santol tree handing plastic sachets containing white crystalline confiscated and/or seized, or his/her representative or counsel, a representative from
substance to certain individuals. At the sight of the police officers, Fernando and the the media and the DOJ, and any elected public official who shall be required to sign
others scampered in different directions. After a brief chase, however, one of the three the copies of the inventory and be given a copy thereof;
police operatives caught up with and apprehended Fernando, then carrying a bag. 2. Within 24 hours upon confiscation/seizure of dangerous drugs, plant sources
of dangerous drugs, controlled precursors and essential chemicals, as well as
Without a trace of equivocation, the RTC and later the CA held that the prosecution instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory equipment, the same shall be
had discharged the burden of proving all the elements of the crime charged. Since submitted to the PDEA Forensic Laboratory for a qualitative and quantitative
Fernando was caught carrying the incriminating bag after the police had been tipped examination.
off of drug pushing in the target area, any suggestion that he was not in actual 3. A certification of the forensic laboratory examination results, which shall be
possession or control of the prohibited drug hidden in the area would be puny. Thus, done under oath by the forensic laboratory examiner, shall be issued within 24 hours
ownership of the bag is truly inconsequential. after the receipt of the subject item/s: Provided, that when the volume of the
dangerous drugs, plant sources of dangerous drugs, and controlled precursors and
We emphasize at this juncture that in no instance did Fernando intimate to the trial essential chemicals does not allow the completion of testing within the time frame, a
court that there were lapses in the safekeeping of the seized items that affected their partial laboratory examination report shall be provisionally issued stating therein the
integrity and evidentiary value. He, thus, veritably admits that the crystalline quantities of dangerous drugs still to be examined by the forensic laboratory:
substance in the sachets found in his bag was the same substance sent for laboratory Provided, however, that a final certification shall be issued on the completed forensic
examination and there positively determined to be shabu and eventually presented in laboratory examination on the same within the next 24 hours;
evidence in court as part of the corpus delicti. In other words, Fernando, before the 4. After the filing of the criminal case, the Court shall, within 72 hours, conduct
RTC and the CA, opted not to make an issue of whether the chain of custody of the an ocular inspection of the confiscated, seized and/or surrendered dangerous drugs,
drugs subject of this case has been broken. This disposition on the part of Fernando plant sources of dangerous drugs, and controlled precursors and essential chemicals,
is deducible from the August 18, 2005 Order of the trial court, pertinently saying, including the instruments/ paraphernalia and/or laboratory equipment, and through
“[The] Acting Provincial Prosecutor x x x and Atty. Emmanuel Abellera, counsel de the PDEA shall within 24 hours thereafter proceed with the destruction or burning of
officio of the accused manifested that the chain of custody of the searched illegal drug the same, in the presence of the accused or the person/s from whom such items were
or shabu is admitted.” confiscated and/or seized, or his/her representative or counsel, a representative from
the media and the DOJ, civil society groups and any elected public official. The Board
As a mode of authenticating evidence, the chain of custody rule requires that the shall draw up the guidelines on the manner of proper disposition and destruction of
presentation of the seized prohibited drugs as an exhibit be preceded by evidence such item/s which shall be borne by the offender: Provided, that those item/s of
sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what the proponent unlawful commerce, as determined by the Board, shall be donated, used or recycled
for legitimate purposes: Provided further, that a representative sample, duly weighed marked evidence from the corpus of all other similar or related evidence from the time
and recorded is retained; they are seized from the accused until they are disposed of at the end of criminal
5. The Board shall then issue a sworn certification as to the fact of destruction or proceedings, obviating switching, “planting,” or contamination of evidence (People of
burning of the subject item/s which, together with the representative sample/s in the the Philippines v. Allen Udtojan Mantalaba, G.R. No. 186227).
custody of the PDEA, shall be submitted to the court having jurisdiction over the
case. In all instances, the representative sample/s shall be kept to a minimum Is the class card an object evidence?
quantity as determined by the Board; and
6. The alleged offender or his/her representative or counsel shall be allowed to It depends. If we pertain solely to the paper itself, the class card itself without having
personally observe all of the above proceedings and his/her presence shall not to look into the contents of the same, it can be said that the class cards partake the
constitute an admission of guilt. In case the said offender or accused refuses or fails nature of object evidence. On the other hand, if there is a need to view the contents
to appoint a representative after due notice in writing to the accused or his/her written on the class cards, they partake the nature of documentary evidence.
counsel within 71 hours before the actual burning or destruction or the evidence in
question, the SOJ shall appoint a member of the PAO to represent the former; Supposing there was an action for damages arising from a quasi-delict on account of
7. After the promulgation and judgment in the criminal case wherein the a vehicular accident. In the complaint, the plaintiff alleged that he figured in the
representative sample/s was presented as evidence in court, the trial prosecutor shall collision and in the process, his arm got amputated. Can the plaintiff bring to the
inform the Board of the final termination of the case and, in turn, shall request the court the amputated arm?
court for leave to turn over the said representative sample/s to the PDEA for proper
disposition and destruction within 24 hours from receipt of the same. Nope. for the following reasons (According to Morana’s recollection of Jara’s
explanation):
Is it necessary that the whole amount of drugs must be presented in evidence?
1. Kadiri. It is offensive to the senses and thus, will violate the norms of decency
No. Only a sample amount as determined by the DDB may be presented to the court. in court proceedings.
2. Madaya. Can you imagine if you are the judge and while you are writing your
How do you then prove the existence of such amount? decision, the amputated arm is right before your eyes? It will be prejudicial to the
defendant in that case.
Through an initial certification and a subsequent ocular inspection done by the court
hearing the case. Is it not the right of the plaintiff to choose the type of object evidence he may desire
for as long as it is relevant?
Is that not substitution?
Yes. That is the GENERAL RULE. However, it must still be subject to the common
No. Since a sample was taken from the very objects that were seized by the authorities norms of public policy, decency and morality.
themselves. Besides, to require the presentation of all the amount/volume of evidence
before the court would only cause great inconvenience. You do not want to destroy What is your legal basis?
Judge Wagan’s mood by wasting her time looking at the stacks of marijuana and
accounting for their volume. Judge Wagan can be very angry. And you would not like Jara: court decisions have established certain grounds to refuse to admit such
it when she’s angry. evidence. (He did not cite any case. Up to you to look for them).
Are pictures in drug cases sufficient? Let us take for example a special proceeding. A person wants to change the sex
indicate in the entry in his birth certificate from male to female. Mali daw ang
No, because the narcotic substance is the very corpus delicti of the crime. nalagay. Dapat daw babae siya. Can the plaintiff undress before the court?
Is failure to comply strictly with the mandate of Sec. 21 of R.A. No. 9165 (pertaining to No. Again, it will offend the norms of decency. It would be better if were done in closed
the custody and disposition of confiscated, seized, and surrendered dangerous drugs, chambers.
etc.) fatal to the prosecution?
What is Demonstrative Evidence? How does one test its admissibility?
No. Non-compliance by the apprehending/buy-bust team with Section 21 is not fatal
as long as there is justifiable ground, and as long as the integrity and the evidentiary Demonstrative evidence is not the actual thing but it is referred to as “demonstrative”
value of the confiscated/seized items are properly preserved by the apprehending because it represents or demonstrates the real thing. It is not strictly “real” evidence
officer/team. Its non-compliance will not render an accused’s arrest illegal or the because it is not the very thing involved in the case. A map, a diagram, a photograph
items seized/confiscated from him inadmissible. What is of utmost importance is the and a model, fall under this category.
preservation of the integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized items, as the same The admissibility of this type of evidence largely depends on laying the proper
would be utilized in the determination of the guilt or innocence of the accused. foundation for the evidence. The rule boils down to one basic question: Does the
Crucial in proving the chain of custody is the marking of the seized driugs or other evidence sufficiently and accurately represent the object it seeks to demonstrate or
related items immediately after thet are seized from the accused. Marking after represent? If it does, the evidence would be admissible
seizure is the starting point in the custodial link, thus, it is vital that the seized
contraband are immediately marked because succeeding handlers of the specimens DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
will use the markings as reference. The marking of the evidence serves to separate the
BEST EVIDENCE RULE 2. The loss and destruction of the original or the reason for its non-production in
court; and
What is Documentary Evidence? 3. On the part of the offeror, the absence of bad faith to which the unavailability
of the original can be attributed.
Documentary Evidence consists of writings or any material containing letters, words,
numbers, figure, symbols or other modes of written expressions offered as proof of The correct order of proof is as follows: existence, execution, loss, and contents
their contents.
Does the “Best Evidence Rule” apply absolutely in all cases a document is presented
For what purpose do we offer documentary evidence? as an evidence in court?
In order to prove the contents of the writing. NO. With respect to documentary evidence, the best evidence rule applies only when
the contents of such document is the subject of inquiry. Where the issue is only as to
What is the Best Evidence Rule? whether such a document was actually executed, or exists, or on the circumstances
relevant to or surrounding its execution, the best evidence rule does not apply and
The term ―best has nothing to do with the degree of its probative value in relation to testimonial evidence is admissible
other types of evidentiary rules. It is not intended to mean the ―most superior
evidence. More accurately, it is the ―original document rule‖ or the ―primary evidence OK. I present the original of a document. Is it automatically admitted?
rule. This rule applies to documentary evidence only, or a document presented as
proof of its contents. It does not apply where there is no bona fide dispute on the No. It has to undergo the process of authentication, except if the document is a public
contents of documents and no useful purpose would be served by its production. document. Depends if the document is public or private.
Simply stated, when the subject of inquiry is the contents of a document, no evidence
shall be admissible other than the original document itself.
Is the Rule Absolute?
PAROL EVIDENCE RULE
No. The Best Evidence Rule admits several exceptions:
What is the Parol Evidence Rule?
1. When the original has been LOST or DESTROYED, or cannot be PRODUCED
in court, without bad faith on the part of the offeror. GENERAL RULE: When the terms of an agreement have been reduced to writing, it is
2. When the original is in the CUSTODY or under the CONTROL of the party considered as containing all the terms agreed upon and there can be, between the
against whom the evidence is offered, and the latter fails to produce it after parties and successors in interest, no evidence of such terms other the contents of the
reasonable notice. written agreement.
3. When the original consists of NUMEROUS ACCOUNTS or other documents
which cannot be examined in court without great loss of time and the fact sought to EXCEPTION: a party may present evidence to modify, explain or add to the terms of
be established from them is only the general result of the whole. the written agreement if he puts in issue in his pleading:
4. When the original is a PUBLIC RECORD in the custody of a public officer or is
recorded in a public office. 1. The failure of the written agreement to express the true intent of the parties
thereto;
Why is there such a rule? 2. The intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the written agreement;
3. The validity of the written agreement;
1. To prevent fraud; 4. The existence of other terms agreed to by the parties or their successors in
2. To exclude uncertainties in the contents of a document interest after the execution of the written agreement.
So if I present a photocopy of a certain document, is it automatically excluded The term “agreement” includes wills.
because of the Best evidence Rule?
What is Parol Evidence?
NO. If the presentation of the photocopied document is only for the purpose of proving
the existence, execution, or the delivery of the said photocopied document without Parol evidence is any evidence aliunde, whether oral or written, which is intended or
any reference as to its terms, such evidence may still be admissible. tends to vary or contradict a complete and enforceable agreement embodied in a
document.
Under the best evidence rule, the original document must be produced whenever its
contents are the subject of inquiry. A photocopy, being mere secondary evidence, is Why is there such a rule?
not admissible unless it is shown that the original is unavailable. Before a party is
allowed to adduce secondary evidence to prove the contents of the original, the offeror When an agreement has been reduced into writing, they are presumed to have
must prove the following: intended the writing as the ONLY EVIDENCE of their agreement, and, therefore, they
are supposed to have embodied all the terms of such agreement. Consequently, all
1. The existence or due execution of the original; prior or contemporaneous collateral stipulations which the parties might have had
and which do not appear in writing, are presumed to have been waived or abandoned contents of the
by them, and therefore, not provable. original.
What kind Applies only Applies to all
of to documents kinds of
documents which are writings.
does the contractual in
How do you determine whether or not the subject of an oral agreement is separate rule apply? nature,
and distinct from the subject of the writing? including
wills.
STEPS:
Only when Can be
1. Determine first what is the whole subject intended by the parties to be covered the invoked by any
by such writing. This question may be determined from the contract itself, in light of controversy is party to an
the subject-matter with which it deals and of the circumstances attending its between the action
execution.
2. Ascertain the subject of the oral agreement offered to be proved. To this effect, Who may parties to the regardless of
the parol evidence may be admitted provisionally. invoke? written whether or not
3. A comparison should be made between the writing and the oral negotiation agreement, such party has
and from that comparison it may be seen whether or not the subject of the writing is their privies, participated in
separate and distinct from that of the oral negotiation.
4. If the subject of the oral negotiation is not so closely connected with the or any party the writing
subject of the writing as to form part and parcel of it, then parol evidence is directly involved.
admissible. affected
thereby.
Distinguish Parol Evidence rule from the Best Evidence Rule.

Parol Best Evidence If the last paragraph in Section 9 of Rule 130 was not included, would parol evidence
Evidence Rule rule still be applicable?
Rule
Presupposes Contemplates
that the the situation
Availability original wherein the Yes. The Civil Code is pretty clear on this one:
of the document is original writing
Original available in is not available
Document court. and/or there is
a dispute as to Art. 789. When there is an imperfect description, or when no person or property
whether said exactly answers the description, mistakes and omissions must be corrected, if the
writing is the error appears from the context of the will or from extrinsic evidence, excluding the
oral declarations of the testator as to his intention; and when an uncertainty arises
original. upon the face of the will, as to the application of any of its provisions, the testator's
Prohibits the Prohibits the intention is to be ascertained from the words of the will, taking into consideration the
varying of introduction of circumstances under which it was made, excluding such oral declarations.
terms of a substitutionary
What the written evidence in
rule agreement. lieu of the
prohibits original AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF DOCUMENTS
document
regardless of
whether or not
it varies the
Let us discuss the process of authenticating a document. What is a public document? A notarized deed of sale is a public document and needs no authentication. A
What is a private document? notarized will, by express provision of the Civil Code and the Rules of Court, needs to
undergo authentication. Even if such is notarized, it cannot be considered a public
document.

Public Documents are:

Why is there a need to authenticate a notarized will?

1. The written official acts, or records of the official acts of the sovereign
authority, official bodies and tribunals, and public officers, whether of the Philippines,
or of a foreign country; Public policy requires it. Courts must at all times give respect to testamentary intent.
In order to prevent fraud, authentication of wills is mandatory.
2. Documents acknowledged before a notary public except last wills and
testaments; and

3. Public records, kept in the Philippines, or private documents required by law How may the genuineness of a notarized deed be assailed?
to be entered therein.

It may be assailed by discrediting the genuineness of the signature, or the

All other documents are private. handwriting, or the identity of the public officer who prepared the same (not sure. But
sounds right).

Is a notarized will a public document?

How do you prove a private document?

NO. Last wills and testament must undergo an authentication process even if they are
notarized. The substantive rule in the Civil Code provides that: “No will shall pass The due execution and authenticity of a private document must be proved either by:
either real or personal estate unless it is proved and allowed in the probate court.”

1. Anyone who saw the document executed or written;

Therefore, is Sec. 19, Rule 132 applicable to wills?
2. Evidence of the genuineness of the signature or handwriting of the maker.

Hindi phowZ. Jejeje.

It is therefore NOT NECESSARY that the witness be an eyewitness

Distinguish a notarized deed of sale from a notarized will.

Must all private documents undergo the process of authentication?
NO. The following are private writings which may be admitted in evidence without
previous proof of its authenticity and due execution:
Documents written in an unofficial language shall not be admitted as evidence, unless
1. When the genuineness and due execution of the document is admitted by the accompanied with a translation into English or Filipino. To avoid interruption of
adverse party; proceedings, parties or their attorneys are directed to have such translation prepared
before trial.
2. When such genuineness and due execution are immaterial to the issue; “The assertion is without merit. The aforementioned rule is not always taken literally so long as there
was no prejudice caused to the opposing party (People v. Salison,Jr., G.R. No. 115690, February 20,
3. When the document is an ANCIENT DOCUMENT. 1996, 253 SCRA 758).
To convince the court, present the evidence, get a translation, have a translator take
4. Rule on Actionable Documents – when the adverse party fails to specifically the witness stand as an expert witness, qualify the witness, make him testify and read
deny under oath the genuineness and due execution of the actionable document and the whole thing, then let him translate the language.
to set forth what he claims to be the facts, the same shall be deemed admitted (Rule
8,Sec.8).

5. Request for Admission – if the party fails to specifically deny the matters on How do you impeach judicial records?
which the admission is requested within the period given, the genuineness and due
execution shall be deemed admitted (Rule 26).

6. Pre-Trial – the parties can enter stipulations and admit the genuineness and 1. By evidence of want of jurisdiction of the court or judicial officer;
due execution.
2. Collusion between the parties;

What are ancient documents? What is the rule with respect to such? 3. Extrinsic fraud on the part of the party offering the record, in respect of the
proceedings.

Requirements for Ancient Document Rule: What happened in the case of US vs. Gregorio?

1. The private document is more than 30 years old; In the suit instituted for the payment of a certain sum of money, judgment was
rendered wherein the debtor was sentenced to pay to the plaintiff P275.92, with
2. It is produced from custody in which it would naturally be found if genuine; interest thereon, and the costs. For the execution of the said judgment, two rural
properties belonging to the debtor were attached. Bernardo Gregorio requested the
3. It is unblemished by any alterations or circumstances of suspicions. deputy sheriff to exclude the said realty from the attachment, alleging that he was the
owner of the land situated in Tambogon, one of the properties levied upon for the
reason that he had acquired it by purchase from the judgment debtor, Balistoy, in
1905, prior to the filing of the complaint. In order that the claim of intervention
presented to the sheriff might prosper, Bernardo Gregorio attached thereto the
It is important to note, however, that the ancient document rule applies only when document Exhibit D, at the end of which and among other particulars appears the
there are no available witnesses to testify as to the authenticity of the document. memorandum dated in Libog as of February 22, 1905, and signed by Eustaquio
Balistoy, Lorenzo Gregorio, and Cirilo Valla, and in which Balistoy states that he
bought the land referred to in the said document from Luis Balistoy and sold it to
Bernardo Gregorio for P300, wherefore he signed as such vendor. A complaint was
filed in each of the two aforesaid causes in the Court of First Instance of Albay,
A documentary evidence in an unofficial language was presented to the court. How charging each of the defendants with the crime of the falsification of a private
can a proponent convince the court that the translation is credible? document.
 In the cadastral proceedings instituted in the Court of Land Registration for the
settlement of titles to lands in the municipality of Iloilo, Province of Iloilo, Dolores and
Issue: WON Balistoy, with intent to injure his creditor, Pedro Salazar, and for the Carmen Martinez appeared claiming to be the owners of lots Nos. 873 and 450. They
purpose of avoiding the attachment and sale of one of the properties did execute or alleged that they were in possession thereof for about twenty-five years, having
write the said memorandum whereby, on February 25, 1905, he made or simulated a acquired them by donation from Maria Sarlabus, and that their predecessors in
conveyance of one of the attached properties in favor of the said Bernardo Gregorio, interest had possession of the same for at least three years prior to said donation.
according to the aforesaid copy, when in fact the said memorandum was written in
April, 1908.

On the otherhand, Julio Salvador, through his attorney, entered his appearance and
claimed title to said lots, alleging that he was in actual possession thereof, and that
Held: In the charge filed in this cause against the vendor and the vendee of the land in his predecessors in interest had been in possession before him for at least fourteen
question, it is stated that these parties, the defendants, simulated the said years. To support their claim, they presented before the court the testimony of two
memorandum of sale or conveyance of the land with the intent to injure the creditor, witnesses and a certified copy issued by the acting registrar of deeds of Iloilo dated
Pedro Salazar; but as the original document, setting forth the said memorandum, was May 13, 1914.
not presented, but merely a copy thereof, and furthermore, as it could not be
ascertained who had the original of the document containing the memorandum in
question, nor the exact date when the latter was written; the said memorandum,
presumed to be simulated and false, was not literally compared by the sheriff who The CFI of Iloilo ruled in favor of Julio Salvador on the ground that, in the opinion of
testified that he had seen its original for but a few moments, nor by any officer the court, it was proved that the Martinez sisters had sold said land to one named
authorized by law to certify to documents and proceedings such as are recorded in Domenech and that the latter, in return, sold it to Julio Salvador, who could,
notarial instruments, nor even by two witnesses who might afterwards have been able therefore, be considered owner of the disputed lots.
to testify before the court that the copy exhibited was in exact agreement with its
original; therefore, on account of these deficiencies, doubt arises as to whether the
original of the document, Exhibit D, really existed at all, and whether the
memorandum at the foot of the said exhibit is an exact copy of that alleged to have
been written at the end of the said original document. Dolores and Carmen Martinez excepted to said judgment and filed a bill of exceptions
after their motion for new trial had been overruled, and they had excepted to the order
overruling said motion.

In criminal proceedings for the falsification of a document, it is indispensable that the

judges and courts have before them the document alleged to have been simulated,
counterfeited, or falsified, in order that they may find, pursuant to the evidence Issue: WON the trial court erred in admitting the copy of the record of a supposed
produced in the cause, whether or not the crime of falsification was committed, and document of sale presented by Julio Salvador, in support of his claim of title without
also, at the same time, to enable them to determine the degree of each defendant's the disappearance or loss of the original document having been previously proved.
liability in the falsification under prosecution. Through the lack of the original
document containing the memorandum alleged to be false, it is improper to hold, with
only a copy of the said original in view, that the crime prosecuted was committed; and
although, judging from the testimony of the witnesses who were examined in the two
consolidated causes, there is reason to entertain much doubt as to the defendants' Held: Yes. Section 299 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides: "The written acts of
innocence, yet, withal, this case does not furnish decisive and conclusive proof of record of the acts of the sovereign authority, of official bodies and tribunals and of
their respective guilt as co-principals of the crime charged. Defendants in a criminal public officers, legislative, judicial, and executive of the Philippine Islands, or of the
cause are always presumed to be innocent until their guilt be fully proven, and, in United States, or of any States of the United States or of a foreign country, and public
case of reasonable doubt and when their guilt is not satisfactorily shown, they are records kept in the Philippine Islands of private writings are public writings. A copy of
entitled to a judgment of acquittal. a public writing, duly certified to be a true copy thereof, is admissible evidence in like
cases and in like effect as the original writing."

What happened in Government vs. Martinez?

The certified copy issued by the acting registrar of deeds of Iloilo, Exhibit 2, is not a
true copy of the document of sale which is said to have been executed by the Martinez
sisters in favor of Antonio Domenech, but of the recital appearing in the books of said
registry with respect to the urban property, consisting of those two lots.
 search therefor was made in the general files of notarial documents in the City of
Manila, or that an attempt was made to secure a copy thereof if it existed in said files;
In the case at bar, Julio Salvador, had not first complied with the provisions of section as the notary, Gregorio Yulo, a person well known in Iloilo, was not asked directly and
321 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The Supreme Court ruled that the best obtainable clearly as to the whereabouts of said document or some particular or data it in order
evidence should be adduced to prove every disputed fact, and a failure to produce it, to obtain from him some conclusive and categorical answer; as said notary has not
but an attempt instead to sustain the issue by inferior evidence, will authorize the been presented at the trial to be examined on these points; and, lastly, as it was not
inference that the party does not furnish the best evidence because it would tend to shown that the party interested in the presentation of said document who is Julio
defeat, instead of sustaining, the issue of his part. In requiring the production of the Salvador, had made a diligent and proper, but fruitless, search for said document in
best evidence applicable to each particular fact, it is meant that no evidence shall be any place where it could probably be found — therefore the secondary evidence
received which is merely substitutionary in its nature, so long as the original evidence presented by the oppositor, consisting of the testimony of the witnesses, Saez and
can be had. Madrenas, and the certified copy issued by the registrar of deeds of Iloilo, Exhibit 2, is
of no value for the purpose intended and such evidence was improperly considered by
the court in reaching the conclusion that said Julio Salvador was the owner of the lots
in question.

Undoubtedly the best evidence of the contents of a written instrument consists in the
actual production of the instrument itself, and the general rule is that secondary
evidence of its contents cannot be admitted until the nonproduction of the original The judgment appealed from is therefore reversed and the claims of Julio Salvador is
has been satisfactory accounted for. denied; and we declare that the two lots Nos. 873 and 450 should be adjudicated to
the appellants Carmen and Dolores Martinez and be registered in their name. No
special pronouncement is made as to costs. So ordered.

Secondary evidence of the contents of writings if admitted on the theory that the
original cannot be produced by the party by whom the evidence is offered, within a
reasonable time by the exercise of reasonable diligence. And ordinarily secondary
evidence is not admissible until the nonproduction of the primary evidence has been
sufficiently accounted for.

The contents of a lost instrument cannot be proved unless it appears that reasonable
search has been made in the place where the paper was last know to have been, and What happened in the case of MCC vs. Ssangyong?
if not found there, that inquiry has been made of the person last known to have had
its custody.

Facts: Petitioner MCC Industrial Sales (MCC), a domestic corporation with office at
Binondo, Manila, is engaged in the business of importing and wholesaling stainless
In accordance with the rule set forth in the next preceding paragraph parol evidence steel products. One of its suppliers is the Ssangyong Corporation (Ssangyong), an
of the contents of a will is inadmissible, unless it is first shown that diligent and international trading company with head office in Seoul, South Korea and regional
unavailing search has been made for the original, by or at the request of the party headquarters in Makati City, Philippines. The two corporations conducted business
interested, and in the place where it is most likely to be found. . . . But to justify through telephone calls and facsimile or telecopy transmissions. Ssangyong would
admission of secondary evidence of a deed, it is not necessary to prove its loss beyond send the pro forma invoices containing the details of the steel product order to MCC;
all possibility of mistake. A reasonable probability of its loss is sufficient; and this if the latter conforms thereto, its representative affixes his signature on the faxed copy
may be shown by a bona fide and diligent search, fruitless made for it in places where and sends it back to Ssangyong, again by fax.
it is likely to be found.

Due to the failure of MCC to put up a Letter of Credit, Ssangyong sued MCC in the
As the failure of the oppositor Salvador to present the original document in question RTC. After Ssangyong rested its case, defendants filed a demurrer to evidence,
was not accounted for; as it is not proper to suppose that the original could not have alleging that Ssangyong failed to present the original copies of the pro forma invoices
been presented within a reasonable time if he had exercised due diligence for he or his on which the civil action was based. In an Order dated April 24, 2003, the court
counsel had the means, opportunity and time to find the original if it really existed; as denied the demurrer, ruling that the documentary evidence presented had already
no proof was adduced that said document had been lost, or destroyed, or that proper been admitted in the December 16, 2002 Order and their admissibility finds support
in RA 8792, otherwise known as the Electronic Commerce Act of 2000. Considering facsimile transmissions, which have an original paper-based copy as sent and a
that both testimonial and documentary evidence tended to substantiate the material paper-based facsimile copy as received. These two copies are distinct from each other
allegations in the complaint, Ssangyong's evidence sufficed for purposes of a prima and have different legal effects. While Congress anticipated future developments in
facie case. RTC ruled in favor of Ssangyong, so did the CA. communications and computer technology when it drafted the law, it excluded the
early forms of technology, like telegraph, telex and telecopy (except computer-
generated faxes, which is a newer development as compared with the ordinary fax
machine to fax machine transmission), when it defined the term "electronic data
message."
Issue: WON the printout and/or photocopies of facsimile transmissions are electronic
evidence and admissible as such.

We, therefore, conclude that the terms "electronic data message" and "electronic
document," as defined under the Electronic Commerce Act of 2000, do not include a
Held: Although the parties did not raise the question whether the original facsimile facsimile transmission. Accordingly, a facsimile transmission cannot be considered as
transmissions are "electronic data messages" or "electronic documents" within the electronic evidence. It is not the functional equivalent of an original under the Best
context of the Electronic Commerce Act (the petitioner merely assails as inadmissible Evidence Rule and is not admissible as electronic evidence.
evidence the photocopies of the said facsimile transmissions), we deem it appropriate
to determine first whether the said fax transmissions are indeed within the coverage
of RA 8792 before ruling on whether the photocopies thereof are covered by the law.

RA 8792, otherwise known as the Electronic Commerce Act of 2000, considers an Since a facsimile transmission is not an "electronic data message" or an "electronic
electronic data message or an electronic document as the functional equivalent of a document," and cannot be considered as electronic evidence by the Court, with
written document for evidentiary purposes. The Rules on Electronic Evidence regards greater reason is a photocopy of such a fax transmission not electronic evidence.
an electronic document as admissible in evidence if it complies with the rules on
admissibility prescribed by the Rules of Court and related laws and is authenticated
in the manner prescribed by the said Rules. An electronic document is also the
equivalent of an original document under the Best Evidence Rule, if it is a printout or Ang vs. CA?
output readable by sight or other means, shown to reflect the data accurately. Thus,
to be admissible in evidence as an electronic data message or to be considered as the
functional equivalent of an original document under the Best Evidence Rule, the
writing must foremost be an "electronic data message" or an "electronic document."
Facts: Rustan Ang and private respondent Irish Sagud were sweethearts on an “on-
and-off” basis towards the end of 2004. When Irish learned afterwards that Rustan
had taken a live-in partner (now his wife), whom he had gotten pregnant, Irish broke
According to the deliberations in Congress, when Congress formulated the term up with him. Before Rustan got married, however, he got in touch with Irish and tried
"electronic data message," it intended the same meaning as the term "electronic to convince her to elope with him, saying that he did not love the woman he was
record" in the Canada law. This construction of the term "electronic data message," about to marry. Irish rejected the proposal and told Rustan to take on his
which excludes telexes or faxes, except computer-generated faxes, is in harmony with responsibility to the other woman and their child. One day, Irish received through
the Electronic Commerce Law's focus on "paperless" communications and the multimedia message service a picture of a naked woman with spread legs with her
"functional equivalent approach" that it espouses. In fact, the deliberations of the face superimposed on the figure. The message allegedly came from Rustan’s number.
legislature are replete with discussions on paperless and digital transactions. After she got the obscene picture, Irish got other text messages from Rustan. He
Facsimile transmissions are not, in this sense, "paperless," but verily are paper-based. boasted that it would be easy for him to create similarly scandalous pictures of her.
And he threatened to spread the picture he sent through the internet. Subsequently,
a criminal complaint for violation against women through harassment was filed
against Rustan. During trial, Rustan claimed that Irish merely sought his help to
identify a prankster who was sending her malicious text messages. Rustan got the
Accordingly, in an ordinary facsimile transmission, there exists an original paper- sender’s number and, pretending to be Irish, contacted the person. Rustan claims
based information or data that is scanned, sent through a phone line, and reprinted that he got back obscene messages from the prankster, which he forwarded to Irish
at the receiving end. Be it noted that in enacting the Electronic Commerce Act of from his cellphone. This explained, he said, why the obscene messages appeared to
2000, Congress intended virtual or paperless writings to be the functional equivalent have originated from his cellphone number. After trial, the RTC gave more credence to
and to have the same legal function as paper-based documents. Further, in a virtual Irish’s testimony. The lower court found Irish’s testimony completely credible, given in
or paperless environment, technically, there is no original copy to speak of, as all an honest and spontaneous manner, and hence convicted Rustan of the crime of
direct printouts of the virtual reality are the same, in all respects, and are considered violence against women through harassment. Upon appeal, CA affirmed the RTC
as originals. Ineluctably, the law's definition of "electronic data message," which, as decision. Rustan interposed, among others, that the obscene picture should be
aforesaid, is interchangeable with "electronic document," could not have included inadmissible as evidence since such picture sent to Irish through a text message
constitutes an electronic document and thus should be authenticated under the means. When the Senate voted to adopt the term “electronic data message,” it was
Rules on Electronic Evidence. consonant with the explanation of Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago that it would
not apply “to telexes or faxes, except computer generated faxes, unlike the UN model
law on electronic commerce.”

Issue: WON the RTC properly admitted in evidence the obscene picture presented in
the case.
There is no question that when Congress formulated the term “electronic data
message,” it intended the same meaning as the term “electronic record” in the Canada
law. This construction of the term “electronic data message,” which excludes telexes
or faxes, except computer generated faxes, is in harmony with the Electronic
Held: Yes. The Court noted that the objection of Rustan as to the admissibility of the Commerce Law’s focus on “paperless” communications and the “functional equivalent
obscene picture as evidence was already too late since he should have objected to the approach” that it espouses. In fact, the deliberations of the Legislature are replete
admission of the picture on such ground at the time it was offered in evidence. He with discussions on paperless and digital transactions.
should be deemed to have already waived such ground for objection. Besides, the
Rules on Electronic Evidence do not apply to the present criminal action. It was held
that it applies only to civil actions, quasi-judicial proceedings, and administrative
proceedings. Accordingly, the Court affirmed RTC’s admission in evidence of the
subject obscene picture. Since a facsimile transmission is not an “electronic data message” or an “electronic
document,” and cannot be considered as electronic evidence by the Court, with
greater reason is a photocopy of such a fax transmission not considered electronic
evidence (MCC Industrial Sales, Corp. v. Ssangyong Corp., G.R. No. 170633).
ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE

How does one treat “text messages” as evidence?

Note: Codal provisions lang ang labanan dito. Please read the rules.

Text messages have been classified as “ephemeral electronic communication” under

Sec. 1 (k), Rule 2 of the Rules on Electronic Evidence, and “shall be proven by the
When is electronic evidence regarded as being the equivalent of an original document testimony of a person who was a party to the same or has personal knowledge
under the Best Evidence Rule? thereof.” “Ephemeral electronic communication” refers to telephone conversations,
text messages and other electronic forms of communication the evidence of which is
not recorded or retained (Vidallon-Magtolis v. Salud., A.M. No. CA-05-20-P).

An electronic document shall be regarded as the equivalent of an original document TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE
under the Best Evidence Rule if it is a printout or output readable by sight or other
means, shown to reflect the data accurately.

QUALIFICATIONS AND DISQUALIFICATIONS OF WITNESSES

May a print-out or photocopy or both of facsimile transmissions be considered as

electronic evidence and admissible as the term is defined under the E-Commerce Act
and its implementing rules? What are the necessary qualifications in order for one to be a witness?

NO. The definitions under the E-Commerce Act, its IRR and the Rules on Electronic All persons who can perceive, and perceiving, can make known their perception to
Evidence, at first glance, convey the impression that facsimile transmissions are others, may be witnesses.
electronic data messages or electronic documents because they are sent by electronic
 his capacity to communicate his rules. it refers to the weight and the
perception to others. It also includes the trustworthiness or reliability of the
Are there any disqualifications? absence of any disqualifications imposed testimony.
upon a witness.

When do you determine the qualifications of a witness?

Disqualifications of a witness:
The qualifications and disqualifications of a witnesses are determined as of the time
said witnesses are produced for examination in court or at the taking of their
depositions. With respect to children of tender years, their competence at the time of
1. Disqualification by reason of mental incapacity or immaturity; the occurrence to be testified should also be taken into account, especially if such
event took place long before their production as witnesses.
2. Disqualification by reason of marriage;

3. Dead Man’s statute; Distinguish spousal immunity from marital privilege.

4. Privileged communications; Disqualification by Disqualification by

Reason of Marriage Reason of Privileged
5. Parental and filial privileges; Communication between
spouses
6. Art. 821 of the New Civil Code disqualifies those who have been convicted of Period for Prohibition Applies only during their Applies even after the
falsification of a document, perjury or false testimony from being witnesses to a will. marriage marriage
Scope of Prohibition Any communication As to communication
7. Section 17, Rule 119 of the Rules of Court requires that the accused sought to
be discharged to be state witness has not at any time been convicted of any offense received by one from the received in confidence by
involving moral turpitude. The same requirement is provided for a state witness under other one from the other during
R.A. 6981 or Witness Protection, Security and Benefit Act. their marriage
Exception 1. Unless there is consent by the other spouse; or
2. Except in a civil case by one against the other, or
in a criminal case fro a crime committed by one
Are deaf-mutes disqualified to testify as witnesses? against the other or the latter’s direct
descendants or ascendants.

Can you compel an adverse party to be your witness?

NO. deaf-mutes are not necessarily incompetent as witnesses. They are competent
where they: (a) can understand and appreciate the sanctity of an oath; (b) can Yes, in civil cases. Such party is then treated as a hostile witness. However, there
comprehend the facts they are going to testify to; and (c) can communicate their ideas
through a qualified interpreter (People v. Tuangco, 345 SCRA 429) must be compliance with the requirements of Rule 25 and Rule 26 of the Rules of
Court (SHOTGUN QUESTION).

RULE ON THE EXAMINATION OF A CHILD WITNESS

Distinguish competency of a witness and credibility of a witness.
When is the rule on examination of child witnesses applicable?
Competency of a witness Credibility of a witness
Has reference to the qualifications of a Refers to the believability of the witness
witness as his capacity to perceive and and has nothing to do with the law or the
Examination of child witnesses who are victims, accused, and witnesses to crime. It (c) The guardian ad litem shall be notified of all proceedings but shall not participate
shall apply in all criminal proceedings and non-criminal proceedings involving child in the trial. However, he may file motions pursuant to sections 9, 10, 25, 26, 27 and
witnesses 31(c). If the guardian ad litem is a lawyer, he may object during trial that questions
asked of the child are not appropriate to his developmental level.
How shall the rule be construed?
(d) The guardian ad litem may communicate concerns regarding the child to the court
Liberally, to uphold the best interests of the child, and to promote maximum through an officer of the court designated for that purpose.
accommodation of child witnesses, without prejudice to the rights of the accused.
(e) The guardian ad litem shall not testify in any proceeding concerning any
Who may be considered a child witness? information, statement, or opinion received from the child in the course of serving as
a guardian ad litem, unless the court finds it necessary to promote the best interests
Any person who, at the time of giving testimony, is below the age of 18 years. In child of the child.
abuse cases, a child includes one over 18 years but is found by the court as unable to
fully take care of himself or protect himself from abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation, (f) The guardian ad litem shall be presumed to have acted in good faith in compliance
or discrimination because of a physical or mental disability or condition. with his duties described in sub-section (b).

Who is a “guardian ad litem”? What are “the best interests of the child”?

A person appointed by the court where the case is pending for a child who is a victim The totality of the circumstances and conditions as are most congenial to the survival,
of, accused of, or a witness to a crime to protect the best interests of the said child. protection, and feelings of security of the child and most encouraging to his physical,
psychological, and emotional development. It also means the least detrimental
What are the powers and functions of the Guardian Ad Litem? available alternative for safeguarding the growth and development of the child.

Section 5. Guardian ad litem. – What is the rule with regard to the qualification of the child as a witness?

(a) The court may appoint a guardian ad litem for a child who is a victim of, accused Every child is presumed qualified to be a witness. However, the court shall conduct a
of, or a witness to a crime to promote the best interests of the child. In making the competency examination of a child, motu proprio or on motion of a party, when it finds
appointment, the court shall consider the background of the guardian ad litem and that substantial doubt exists regarding the ability of the child to perceive, remember,
his familiarity with the judicial process, social service programs, and child communicate, distinguish truth from falsehood, or appreciate the duty to tell the
development, giving preference to the parents of the child, if qualified. The guardian truth in court.
ad litem may be a member of the Philippine Bar. A person who is a witness in any
proceeding involving the child cannot be appointed as a guardian ad litem. Who must prove the need for competency examinations?

(b) The guardian ad litem: (1) Shall attend all interviews, depositions, hearings, and A party seeking a competency examination must present proof of necessity of
trial proceedings in which a child participates; (2) Shall make recommendations to the competency examination. The age of the child by itself is not a sufficient basis for a
court concerning the welfare of the child; (3) Shall have access to all reports, competency examination. Moreover, to rebut the presumption of competence enjoyed
evaluations, and records necessary to effectively advocate for the child, except by a child, the burden of proof lies on the party challenging his competence.
privileged communications; (4) Shall marshal and coordinate the delivery of resources
and special services to the child; (5) Shall explain, in language understandable to the Is the competency examination a final determination as to the competence of
child, all legal proceedings, including police investigations, in which the child is the child?
involved; (6) Shall assist the child and his family in coping with the emotional effects
of crime and subsequent criminal or non-criminal proceedings in which the child is No. The court has the duty of continuously assessing the competence of the child
involved; (7) May remain with the child while the child waits to testify; (8) May throughout his testimony.
interview witnesses; and (9) May request additional examinations by medical or
mental health professionals if there is a compelling need therefor. When may the court appoint an interpreter for the child?
Section 9. Interpreter for child. – witness stand, provided the support person does not completely obscure the child
from the view of the opposing party, judge, or hearing officer. (3) The court may allow
(a) When a child does not understand the English or Filipino language or is unable to the support person to hold the hand of the child or take other appropriate steps to
communicate in said languages due to his developmental level, fear, shyness, provide emotional support to the child in the course of the proceedings. (4) The court
disability, or other similar reason, an interpreter whom the child can understand and shall instruct the support persons not to prompt, sway, or influence the child during
who understands the child may be appointed by the court, motu proprio or upon his testimony.
motion, to interpret for the child.
(b) If the support person chosen by the child is also a witness, the court may
(b) If a witness or member of the family of the child is the only person who can serve disapprove the choice if it is sufficiently established that the attendance of the
as an interpreter for the child, he shall not be disqualified and may serve as the support person during the testimony of the child would pose a substantial risk of
interpreter of the child. The interpreter, however, who is also a witness, shall testify influencing or affecting the content of the testimony of the child.
ahead of the child
May the courtroom environment be adjusted to make the child more
(c) An interpreter shall take an oath or affirmation to make a true and accurate comfortable?
interpretation.
When may the court appoint a facilitator to ask questions to the child? Yes. Section 13 says: “To create a more comfortable environment for the child, the
court may, in its discretion, direct and supervise the location, movement and
Section 10. Facilitator to pose questions to child. deportment of all persons in the courtroom including the parties, their counsel, child,
witnesses, support persons, guardian ad litem, facilitator, and court personnel. The
(a) The court may, motu proprio or upon motion, appoint a facilitator if it determines child may be allowed to testify from a place other than the witness chair. The witness
that the child is unable to understand or respond to questions asked. The facilitator chair or other place from which the child testifies may be turned to facilitate his
may be a child psychologist, psychiatrist, social worker, guidance counselor, teacher, testimony but the opposing party and his counsel must have a frontal or profile view
religious leader, parent, or relative. of the child during the testimony of the child. The witness chair or other place from
which the child testifies may also be rearranged to allow the child to see the opposing
(b) If the court appoints a facilitator, the respective counsels for the parties shall pose party and his counsel, if he chooses to look at them, without turning his body or
questions to the child only through the facilitator. The questions shall either be in the leaving the witness stand. The judge need not wear his judicial robe. Nothing in this
words used by counsel or, if the child is not likely to understand the same, in words section or any other provision of law, except official incour identification provisions,
that are comprehensible to the child and which convey the meaning intended by shall be construed to require a child to look at the accused. Accommodations for the
counsel. child under this section need not be supported by a finding of trauma to the child.”

(c) The facilitator shall take an oath or affirmation to pose questions to the child May the child use “testimonial aids” during his / her testimony?
according to the meaning intended by counsel.
Yes. The court shall permit a child to use dolls, anatomically-correct dolls, puppets,
Who is a “support person”? drawings, mannequins, or any other appropriate demonstrative device to assist him in
his testimony.
Person chosen by the child to accompany him to testify at or attend a judicial
proceeding or disposition to provide emotional support for him. May the child be allowed to have an “emotional security item”?

What are the rules relevant to support persons? Yes. While testifying, a child shall be allowed to have an item of his own choosing
such as a blanket, toy, or doll.
Section 11. Support persons. –
Does the examination of the child need to follow strictly the usual procedure for
(a) A child testifying at a judicial proceeding or making a deposition shall have the examination of witnesses?
right to be accompanied by one or two persons of his own choosing to provide him
emotional support. (1) Both support persons shall remain within the view of the child No. Some exceptions are:
during his testimony. (2) One of the support persons may accompany the child to the
 1. The court may allow leading questions in all stages of examination of a child if Does the hearsay rule apply to children’s testimony?
it will further the interests of justice
2. The court may allow the child witness to testify in a narrative form Not strictly, in child abuse cases. A statement made by a child describing any act or
3. Objections must be couched in a manner so as not to mislead, confuse, attempted act of child abuse, not otherwise admissible under the hearsay rule, may
frighten, or intimidate the child. be admitted in evidence in any criminal or non-criminal proceeding subject to certain
rules found in Section 28 (a).
Does the child witness’ testimony need to be corroborated?
May the court admit videotape and audiotape interviews as evidence?
No. His / her testimony, if credible by itself, shall be sufficient.
Yes, under certain conditions imposed under Section 29.
On what grounds may the court exclude the public during the examination of a
child witness? What is the Sexual Abuse Shield Rule?

Such an order may be made to protect the right to privacy of the child or if the court Section 30. Sexual abuse shield rule. -
determines on the record that requiring the child to testify in open court would cause
psychological harm to him, hinder the ascertainment of truth, or result in his inability (a) Inadmissible evidence. - The following evidence is not admissible in any criminal
to effectively communicate due to embarrassment, fear, or timidity. proceeding involving alleged child sexual abuse: (1) Evidence offered to prove that the
alleged victim engaged in other sexual behavior; and (2) Evidence offered to prove the
Does the child need to testify inside the courtroom? sexual predisposition of the alleged victim.

No. The prosecutor, counsel or the guardian ad litem may apply for an order that the (b) Exception. - Evidence of specific instances of sexual behavior by the alleged victim
testimony of the child be taken in a room outside the courtroom and be televised to to prove that a person other than the accused was the source of semen, injury, or
the courtroom by live-link television. Also, the judge may question the child in other physical evidence shall be admissible. A party intending to offer such evidence
chambers, or in some comfortable place other than the courtroom, in the presence of must: (1) File a written motion at least fifteen (15) days before trial, specifically
the support person, guardian ad litem, prosecutor, and counsel for the parties. The describing the evidence and stating the purpose for which it is offered, unless the
questions of the judge shall not be related to the issues at trial but to the feelings of court, for good cause, requires a different time for filing or permits filing during trial;
the child about testifying in the courtroom. and (2) Serve the motion on all parties and the guardian ad litem at least three (3)
days before the hearing of the motion.
What are the grounds to allow testimony by live-link television?
Before admitting such evidence, the court must conduct a hearing in chambers and
If there is a substantial likelihood that the child would suffer trauma from testifying afford the child, his guardian ad litem, the parties, and their counsel a right to attend
in the presence of the accused, his counsel or the prosecutor as the case may be. and be heard. The motion and the record of the hearing must be sealed and remain
What other similar measures may the court take aside from live-link television? under seal and protected by a protective order set forth in section 31(b). The child
shall not be required to testify at the hearing in chambers except with his consent.
The prosecutor or the guardian ad litem may apply for an order that the chair of the
child or that a screen or other device be placed in the courtroom in such a manner How is the privacy of the child protected?
that the child cannot see the accused while testifying. If the court grants an
application to shield the child from the accused while testifying in the courtroom, the Any records regarding the child shall be confidential and kept under seal. Except
courtroom shall be arranged to enable the accused to view the child. upon written request and order of the court, the record may only be released to
certain persons under Section 31(a). Moreover, any videotape or audiotape of a child
May the testimony of the child be given through videotaped deposition? that is part of the court record shall be under a protective order as provided by
Section 31(b). The court may issue additional protection orders to protect the child’s
Yes. If the court finds that the child will not be able to testify in open court at trial, it privacy. Whoever publishes or causes to be published the identifying information of
shall issue an order that the deposition of the child be taken and preserved by the child or the immediate family of the child shall be liable to the contempt power of
videotape. the court. Any videotape or audiotape of a child made part of the court record shall be
destroyed after 5 years from the date of entry of judgment.
How are the ordinary rules of Court applied?

Suppletorily.

When do you challenge the qualification of the witness?

Before he is made to testify on the matters which he/she was presented. Failure to
challenge will uphold the qualification of the witness. Kaya nga daw PRELIMINARY
EXAMINATION ang tawag sabi ni Jara.

Distinguish the manner of taking the testimony of a child witness from that of
an ordinary witness.

Child Witness Ordinary Witness

Only the judge is allowed to ask Opposing counsels are allowed to ask
questions to a child witness during questions during preliminary
preliminary examination. examination.
Leading questions are allowed. Leading questions are generally not
allowed.
Testimony in a narrative form is allowed. Testimony in a narrative form is not
allowed.
The child witness is assisted by a An ordinary witness is not assisted by a
facilitator. facilitator.

What is the Dead Man’s Statute?

Parties or assignors of parties to a case, or persons in whose behalf a case is

prosecuted, against an executor or administrator or other representative of a deceased
person, or against a person of unsound mind, upon a claim or demand against the
estate of such deceased person or against such person of unsound mind, cannot
testify as to any matter of fact occurring before the death of such deceased person or
before such person became of unsound mind. (NOTE: CODAL. VERBATIM.
REQUIRED.)
 2. Testimony on the present possession by the witness of a written instrument
signed by the deceased.
What are the elements of the “Dead Man’s Statute?”
To whom does the rule apply?
1. The defendant in the case is the executor or administrator or a representative
of the deceased or the person of unsound mind; To a witness of the plaintiff who attempts to testify on matters of fact occurring before
2. The suit is upon a claim by the plaintiff against the estate of said deceased the death of such deceased person or before such person became of unsound mind.
person or person of unsound mind;
3. The witness is the plaintiff, or an assignor of that party, or a person in whose
behalf the case is prosecuted;
4. The subject of the testimony is as to any matter of fact occurring before the
death of such person or before such person became of unsound mind. What happened in the case of Icard v. Masigan?

Facts: For services rendered in connection with the development and location of
certain mining claims, Joseph K. Icard filed a claim of P2,000 against the estate of his
A creditor filed a case against the debtor. In case the creditor dies and the deceased father George M. Icard. The claim having been allowed by the commissioner
debtor is alive and of sound mind, does the rule apply? on claims, the administrator appealed to the Court of First Instance, where it was
likewise allowed.
No. The first element of the Dead Man’s Statute is absent in this case. The person who
must have been disabled or who must have died in this case is the defendant. The DOCTRINE: the Dead Man’s Statute is designed to close the lips of the party plaintiff
defendant must be the one therefore being defended in this case. when death has closed the lips of the party defendant, in order to remove from the
surviving party the temptation to falsehood and the possibility of fictitious claims
Under what instances does the rule not apply? against the deceased. Where, as in the instant case, the purpose of the oral testimony
is to prove a lesser claim than what might be warranted by clear written evidence, to
With respect to the FIRST ELEMENT: avoid prejudice to the estate of the deceased, the law has certainly no reason for its
application.
1. Witnesses who are neither parties the case, their assignors, nor persons in
whose behalf the case is prosecuted; What is the latin maxim in that case?
2. A counterclaim has been interposed by the defendant as the plaintiff would
thereby be testifying in his defense. Ratione cessante, cessat ipsa lex.

With respect to the SECOND ELEMENT: Ong Chua vs. Carr?

1. Defendant who is sued in his individual, rather in a representative capacity. Facts: Henry Teck and his wife, Magdalena Lim sold a property to the plaintiff, Ong
Chua. Chua executed a public document granting to the spouses the right to for the
With respect to the THIRD ELEMENT: sum of P6, 500 within four years from the date of purchase. Later, Edward Carr went
to the office of a practicing lawyer, Moore and sought the advice and assistance of the
1. An administrator who brings an action in behalf of the estate; latter in regard to purchasing coconut lands. Moore then called Carr's attention to the
2. The action is brought by the heirs of a deceased plaintiff who were substituted lots above-mentioned and told him that he could buy the lots for P20, 000, the
for the latter. amount which Chua paid for them to Teck and Lim. Moore informed Carr that Teck
and his wife had the right to repurchase the property in question from Chua and that
With respect to the FOURTH ELEMENT: such rights would expire in June, 1927.

1. Negative testimony, that is testimony that a fact did not occurring during the Both Chua and Carr requested Moore to draw the deed of sale of the property from
lifetime of the deceased; Chua to Carr. Before the drafting of the deed, Chua stated to Moore that he consented
to sell the properties to Carr on the condition that the sale should be subject to the
rights of Teck and Lim to have the property reconveyed to them and that said rights by a mere preponderance of evidence. In these circumstances, we cannot hold that
were to be respected by the vendee. According to Moore's own testimony, Carr was the trial court erred in not excluding the plaintiff's testimony.
fully aware of those rights even before the execution of the deed, December 14, 1925,
and that he consented to embody stipulations to the effect in said deed. Important matters to discuss in the case:

Moore told Carr that the deed of sale could be made in such a form that Carr's title to 1. Nature of the dispute
the property purchased would appear to be absolute but that Carr was to bear in 2. Whether or not the case fell under the parol evidence rule.
mind that the rights of Teck and Lim still existed and that the deed and other 3. The reasons why there was a need to reform
documents must be left in his, Moore's, possession until the expiration of the term for 4. Would it have been different if fraud was proven preliminarily?
the right of repurchase and that, if the deed were made in that form, the loan of
P6,500 (Carr’s deficiency in the purchase price) could be obtained. The deed of sale What is Filial Privilege?
was prepared without including therein the condition that sale was subject to Teck's
and Lim's rights to repurchase. The deed was signed by Chua and duly acknowledged No person may be compelled to testify against his parents, other direct ascendants,
before Moore as notary public. children, or other direct descendants.

Carr paid only P13, 500 in cash and promised, in writing, to pay to the vendor the In relation to the Family Code?
balance of the purchase price. In July, 1926, Teck offered to repurchase the property
in question from Chua who thereupon demanded of Carr the reconveyance of the Under the Family Code, the descendant may be compelled to testify against his
property to the spouses, but Carr refused to do so, claiming that he had an absolute parents and grandparents, if such testimony is indispensable in prosecuting a crime
title to said property, and Chua then learned, for the first time, that the deed in against the descendant or by one parent against another.
question contained no reference to the rights of Teck and Lim to repurchase the
property. On July 23, 1926, this action was brought with the plaintiff demanding that Does this rule apply to both civil and criminal cases?
the deed in question be reformed in accordance therewith. Subsequent to the filling of
the answer, Carr died, and the administrator of his estate was substituted as No. only in civil cases. See modifications made under the family code.
defendant. Upon such facts the court below ordered the reformation of the deed in
accordance with the plaintiff's demand. Hence, this appeal. Can modes of discovery be instead used if not allowed to testify?

Issue: WON the court erred in permitting the plaintiff, Chua, to testify, over the No. Not even depositions may be used as the same constitutes testimonial evidence.
defendant's objections, to fact occurring prior to the death of the defendant Carr
If the plaintiff makes use of the same depositions as evidence, may it be
Held: The rules bar parties to an action or proceeding against an executor or admitted in court?
administrator or other representative of a deceased person upon a claim or demand
against the estate of such deceased person from testifying as to any matter of fact According to Hans Morana, no. Because the same was made in violation of the rules.
occurring before the death of such deceased person. But it has generally been given a
liberal construction to promote justice, and it is held that it never was intended to What are privileged communications found under the Rules of Court?
serve as a shield for fraud. As stated in Jones on Evidence: The evidence of an adverse
party is absolutely excluded by an independent, affirmative enactment making him Sec. 24 deals with types of disqualifications by reason of privileged communication, to
incompetent as to transactions or communications with a deceased or incompetent wit:
person. These statutes, however, do not render the adverse party incompetent to
testify to fraudulent transactions of the deceased, as the statutes are not designed to 1. Communication between husband and wife;
shield wrongdoers but the courts compel the adverse party to clearly establish the 2. Communication between attorney and client;
alleged fraudulent acts before admitting such testimony. In this case, a number of 3. Communications between physician and patient;
credible witnesses testified to facts which conclusively showed that Carr's conduct 4. Communications between a priest and a penitent;
was tainted with fraud. The plaintiff did not take the witness stand until after the 5. Public officers and public interest.
existence of fraud on the part of Carr and been established beyond a doubt and not
Is the enumeration exclusive?
 Society has a deeply-rooted interest in the preservation of peace of families and in the
NO. there are other privileged matters not mentioned under Sec. 130 such as: maintenance of the sacred institution of marriage, and its strongest safeguard is to
preserve with zealous care any violations of those hollowed confidences inherent in,
1. Editors may not be compelled to disclose the source of published news; and inseparable from the marital status.
2. Voters may not be compelled to disclose for whom they voted;
3. Trade secrets;
4. Information contained in tax census returns; Can privileged communication be used to quash a subpoena?
5. Bank deposits;
6. Statements made in labor conciliation proceedings; No. Sec. 4 of Rule 21 provides for exclusive grounds to quash a subpoena:
7. Communications of suspicious transactions to AMLC under the AMLA.
Quashing a Subpoena Duces Tecum:
What is the common element among such privileged communications?
1. The subpoena is unreasonable and oppressive;
The core element in the said enumeration is the confidence reposed by the person 2. The relevancy of the books, documents, or things does not appear;
giving such information to another who receives the same. 3. If the person in whose behalf the subpoena is issued fails to advance the
reasonable cost of the production thereof.
In marital privilege, what is the standard in determining whether the utterance
was given in confidence? Quashing a Subpoena ad Testificandum:

The expression “any communication” means confidential communications during 1. Witness is not bound thereby;
marital relationship. The essence of the privilege is to protect confidences only. And 2. Witness fees and kilometrage allowed by these rules were not tendered when
this must be true, because there can be no reason arising out from public policy, or the subpoena was served.
otherwise, requiring that every word spoken between the husband and wife shall be
privileged, irrespective of the presence in which spoken or the subject or occasion Furthermore, the marital disqualification rule does not provide for an absolute
thereof. The spirit of the rule is that the privilege shall be construed to embrace only disqualification. The witness may still be summoned by the court but he is may be
the knowledge which the husband or wife obtains from the other, which, but for the prohibited only to testify on matters that are covered by the marital privilege rule.
marriage relation and the confidence growing out of it, would not have been
communicated, or which is of such nature or character as that, to repeat the same, For whose benefit is the attorney client privilege?
would tend to unduly embarrass, or disturb the parties in their marital relations.
It is a prohibition made against a counsel for the benefit of his lawyer. Client
What if the same communication was overheard by a third person?
What happened in the case of Regala vs. Sandiganbayan?
If a confidential communication made by one spouse to the other is overheard by a
third person, the communication does not cease to be confidential between the PCGG want to build up their case against Eduardo Coujuanco for the anomalies in
spouses, and neither of them can testify without the consent of the other. But the the COCO LEVY FUNDS. PCGG wants petitioners divulge that Cojuangco indeed was
legal prohibition to testify is directed to the spouses only, and accordingly, the third a client of their firm, as well as other information regarding Cojuangco.
person overhearing cannot be prevented from testifying. For the same reason, where a
privileged communication from one spouse to another comes into the hands of a third Issue: Can the PCGG compel petitioners to divulge its client’s name?
party, the latter may testify. But if the third party comes into possession of the
communication by collusion and voluntary disclosure on the part of either of the Held: NO.
spouses, he thereby becomes an agent of such spouse and cannot testify without the
consent of the latter. As a matter of public policy, a client’s identity should not be shrouded in mystery. The
general is that a lawyer may not invoke the privilege and refuse to divulge the name or
What is the reason for the privilege? identity of his client.
1) the court has a right to know that the client whose privileged information is sought
to be protected is flesh and blood. A disserving statement or an admission is any extra-judicial statement or conduct (act
or omission) by a party that is inconsistent with the position the party presently
2) the privilege begins to exist only after the attorney-client relationship has been takes.
established. The attorney-client privilege does not attach until there is a client.
Declaration that “I am a tenant of this house.” Is that an admission?
3) the privilege generally pertains to the subject matter of the relationship.
It depends. See 2004 Jara Notes for a clearer discussion.
Finally, due process considerations require that the opposing party should, as a
general rule, know his adversary. “A party suing or sued is entitled to know who his What are the requisites for an admission to be admissible?
opponent is.” He cannot be obliged to grope in the dark against unknown forces.
1. It must involve matters of fact and not of law;
Except: 2. Be categorical and definite;
3. Be knowingly and voluntarily made;
1) Client identity is privileged where a strong probability exists that revealing the 4. Be adverse to the admitter’s interest; otherwise it would be self-serving and
client’s name would implicate that client in the very activity for which he sought the inadmissible.
lawyer’s advice.
Why is an admission admissible while a self-serving statement not admissible?
2) Where disclosure would open the client to civil liability, his identity is privileged.
Man cannot make evidence for himself. The reason for the rule is that what a man
3) Where the government’s lawyers have no case against an attorney’s client unless, says against his own interest may be safely believed; but it is not safe to credit him
by revealing the client’s name, the said name would furnish the only link that would where he is advocating his interest.
form the chain of testimony necessary to convict an individual of a crime, the client’s
name is privileged. If a statement favorable to the interests of the witness is uttered in court, is it
That client identity is privileged in those instances where a strong probability exists still self-serving?
that the disclosure of the client's identity would implicate the client in the very
criminal activity for which the lawyer’s legal advice was obtained. Not anymore. Self-serving statements are allowed to be made in court. Malamang
kelangan mo ipaglaban yung kaso mo.
The case was decided by a divided Supreme Court and therefore could not be
considered a doctrinal pronouncement. What do you think was the big problem?
Give an example of a self-serving statement
The main contention of the dissenters was that the rule on attorney-client privilege
cannot be used to hide a crime and the anomalies involving the coco-levy funds WARNING: make sure na kumpleto lahat ng elements niyo kapag nagbigay kayo ng
involved a crime. However, the point was resolved by the majority in this light: the example. SHOTGUN QUESTION ETO.
client was still in the process of discussing business matters with the law firm. No
crime has yet to be committed since the same was in an indeterminate stage. Unless What happened in the case of Estrada vs. Desierto?
it becomes clear that the matters confided upon the lawyers of the client constitute a
crime, ACCRA had no obligation to divulge information regarding the same. Doctrine: The Angara diary is admissible in evidence. It partakes the nature of an
adoptive admission. An adoptive admission is a party’s reaction to a statement or
ADMISSIONS AND CONFESSIONS action by another person when it is reasonable to treat the party’s reaction as an
admission of something stated or implied by the other person.
What is a self-serving statement?
What happened in People vs. Holgado?
It refers to one which has been made extra-judicially by the party to favor his interest.
Facts: Sisenando Holgado and Filomeno Morales had disputes about the occupation
What is a disserving statement? of certain land situated in the municipality of Pinamalayan, Province of Mindoro. On
the morning of June 15, 1927, the two men happened to meet. The argument was We would like finally to turn attention to what was said by the editor of L. R. A. in his
renewed, and they agreed to fight. They did engage in a bolo duel with a fatal result note in volume 37 hereinbefore referred to, viz:
for Filomeno Morales, who was killed almost instantly. Sisenando Holgado was also
seriously wounded but was able to proceed to a neighboring house. From there The purpose of all evidence is to get at the truth. The reason for the hearsay rule is
Sisenando Holgado was taken to the municipal building where he made a sworn that the extrajudicial and unsworn statement of another is not the best method of
statement before the municipal president, in which he declared that only he and serving this purpose. In other words, the great possibility of the fabrication of
Filomeno Morales fought. About one month later, Sisenando Holgado died from the falsehoods, and the inability to prove their untruth, requires that the doors be closed
wounds received in the fight. to such evidence. So long therefore as a declarant is available as a witness, his
extrajudicial statement should not be heard. Where, however, the declarant is dead or
The disputable point is whether the accused Eugenio Toledo intervened in the quarrel has disappeared, his previous statements, out of court, if not inadmissible on other
and dealt a mortal blow to Filomeno Morales. For the prosecution, there was grounds, are the best evidence. But they are not rendered inadmissible by the mere
presented the witness Justina Villanueva, the querida of Filomeno Morales, who fact that the declarant is unavailable, - something else is necessary. One fact which
testified to the presence and participation of Eugenio Toledo. Her testimony was will satisfy this necessity is that the declaration is or was against the declarant's
partially corroborated by that of the witness Justina Llave. On the other hand, the interest, and this is because no sane person will be presumed to tell a falsehood to his
theory for the defense was that Toledo was in another place when the fight between own detriment.
Morales and Holgado occurred and that his only participation was on meeting
Holgado, who was his landlord or master, in helping him to a nearby house. To this xxx xxx xxx
effect is the testimony of the accused and of Conrado Holgado, the son of Sisenando
Holgado. The defense also relied upon the affidavit of Sisenando Holgado, Exhibit 1, Again, if, seems indisputable, the desire to close the door to falsehood which cannot
which was identified by the municipal president of Pinamalayan. be detected dictates the exclusion of such testimony, the question as to the effect to
be given to such a confession is solely one of weight and credibility. . . .
Issue: WON the declaration of a third person against his own penal interest is covered Any man outside of a court and unhampered by the pressure of technical procedure,
by the exceptions to the hearsay rule. unreasoned rules of evidence, and cumulative authority, would say that if a man
deliberately acknowledged himself to be the perpetrator of a crime and exonerated the
Held: Yes. In the case of Pace vs. State ([1911], Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, person charged with the crime, and there was other evidence indicative of the
135 Southwestern, 379), the appellant offered to prove in the trial court by the truthfulness of the statement, the accused man should not be permitted to go to
witness Byron Kyle that on Saturday morning following the killing of the deceased on prison or to the electric chair to expiate a crime he never committed. Shall Judges
the previous Sunday he had a conversation with Dick Cain, one of the parties to the trained and experienced in the law display less discerning common sense that the
homicide, in which Dick Cain admitted the he killed the deceased. The court ruled: layman and allow precedent to overcome truth?

. . . Wherever the state seeks to fasten criminality upon the party on trial, the accused Adoptive admission vs. Admission by Silence
had a right to meet and rebut any testimony which may be offered against him in any
legitimate way. If Cain had been upon trial, his confession to the witness Kyle would Adoptive Admission Admission by Silence
have been admissible beyond any shadow of doubt, and would have been upon trial,
his confession to the witness Kyle would have been admissible beyond any shadow of A party‘s reaction to a statement or An act or declaration made in the
doubt, and would have been strong evidence to go before the jury. The estate would action by another person when it is presence and within the hearing or
have been seeking to introduce this and with great earnestness, and correctly so. If reasonable to treat the party‘s reaction observation of a party who does or says
appellant could prove that another party or others committed the homicide, it might as an admission of something stated or nothing when the act or declaration is
prove his innocence, and would be strong evidence to go before the jury in his favor. implied by the other person such as naturally to call for action or
Any legitimate fact or circumstance which would meet or tend to meet the state's case comment if not true, and when proper
and break the force of criminative facts introduced against the accused is always and possible for him to do so.
admissible. Appellant's contention was that he did not kill the deceased, but that Cain
did. The state's theory was the appellant shot the deceased, and Cain did not shoot
him. Under the rules of evidence this testimony was clearly inadmissible.
What is the principle of Res Inter Alios Acta? 4. Said accused does not appear to be the most guilty; and
5. Said accused has not at any time been convicted of any offense involving moral
The res inter alios acta rule ordains that the rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by turpitude.
an act, declaration, or omission of another. An extrajudicial confession is binding
onlyupon the confessant and is not admissible against his co-accused. the reason for Should a motion be filed?
the rule is that, on a principle of good faith and mutual convenience, a man’s own
acts are binding upon himself, and are evidence against him. So are his conduct and Yes. A motion must be filed by the prosecution before it rests its case.
declarations. Yet it would not be rightly inconvenient, but also manifestly unjust, that
a man should be bound by the acts of mere unauthorized strangers; and if a party Does it have to be heard ex-parte?
ought not to be bound by the acts of strangers, neither ought their acts or conduct be
used as evidence against him (People v. Raquel, G.R. No. 119005). NO. before resolving such motion to discharge the accused to be a state-witness, the
court shall require the prosecution to present evidence and the sworn statement of
What are the two branches of the Res Inter Alios Acta Rule? the proposed state witness at a hearing of the motion to discharge.

1. The rule that the rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, As prosecutor, how do you plan to convince the court to allow the accused to
or omission of another; testify?
2. The rule that evidence of previous conduct or similar acts at one time is not
admissible to prove that one did or did not do the same act at another time. You convince the court by complying with all the requisites mandated by the law for
one to become state witness. More importantly, you have to prove that the accused
What are the exceptions to the rule? applying to become a state-witness must not be the most guilty of the crime charged.

1. Admission by a co-partner or agent; What assurance can you give the proposed state-witness in case he testifies?
2. Admission by a co-conspirator;
3. Admission by privies. If the court denies the motion for discharge of the accused as state witness, his sworn
statement shall be inadmissible as evidence.
If a person takes the witness stand and makes an admission prejudicial to a
third person, is the rule on “res inter alios acta” still applicable? Discuss the procedure for one to become a witness for purposes of RA 6981.

NO. Statements made in open court by a witness implicating a person aside from his MEMAID WORK LANG ITO.
own judicial admissions, are admissible as declarations from one who has personal
knowledge of the facts testified thereto.
What is the assurance that the accused will testify for the state?
Who is a state witness?
Any witness admitted into the program of the Witness Protection, Security and Benefit
He is one of two or more persons jointly charged with the commission of a crime but Act cannot refuse to testify or give evidence or produce books, documents, records or
who is discharged with his consent as such accused so that he may be a witness for writings necessary for the prosecution of the offense or offenses for which he has been
the State admitted into the Program on the ground of the constitutional right against self-
incrimination but he shall enjoy immunity from criminal prosecution and cannot be
What are the requisites for one to be a state witness? subjected to any penalty or forfeiture for any transaction, matter or thing concerning
his compelled testimony or books, documents, records and writings produced (Sec.
1. There is absolute necessity for the testimony of the accused whose discharge is 14, R.A. 6981).
requested;
2. There is no other direct evidence available for the proper prosecution of the Who may be admitted to the Witness Protection, Security and Benefit Program?
offense committed, except the testimony of the said accused;
3. The testimony of said accused can be substantially corroborated in its material Any person who has witnessed or has knowledge or information on the commission of
points; a crime and has testified or is testifying or about to testify before any judicial or
quasi-judicial body, or before any investigating authority may be admitted provided No. a plea of guilty later withdrawn, or an unaccepted offer of a plea of guilty to a
that: lesser offense, is not admissible in evidence against the accused who made the plea or
offer.
1. the offense in which his testimony will be used is a grave felony as defined
under the Revised Penal Code, or its equivalent under special laws; Is the same applicable in a civil case? If so, how can you do it?
2. his testimony can be substantially corroborated in its material points;
3. he or any member of his family within the second civil degree of consanguinity Yes. Such can be done by amending a party’s pleadings. Upon admissions made in an
or affinity is subjected to threats to life or bodily injury or there is a likelihood answer – he can amend the admissions in the answer into a specific denial.
that he will be killed, forced, intimidated, harassed or corrupted to prevent
him from testifying, or to testify falsely, or evasively, because or on account of
his testimony; and
4. he is not a law enforcement officer, even if he would be testifying against the
other law enforcement officers. In such a case, only the immediate members of RULE NO DNA EVIDENCE
his family may avail themselves of the protection provided for under the Act
(Sec. 3, R.A. 6981). What is DNA?

DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) is the chain of molecules found in every nucleated cell of
the body (Sec. 3, Rule on DNA Evidence). It is the fundamental building block of a
person’s entire genetic make-up, which is found in all human cells and is the same in
every cell of the same person (People v. Umanito, G.R. No. 172607, Oct. 26, 2007).
If the person does not comply with the conditions, may the sworn statement be
used against him? (Sworn statement of a person who refuses to testify thereon) What is DNA evidence?

Yes, if he fails or refuses to testify or to continue to testify without just cause when It constitutes the totality of the DNA profiles, results and other genetic information
lawfully obliged to do so, he shall be prosecuted for contempt. If he testifies falsely or directly generated from DNA testing of biological samples (Sec. 3).
evasively, he shall be liable to prosecution for perjury. If a State witness fails or
refuses to testify, or testifies falsely or evasively, or violates any condition What is DNA testing?
accompanying such immunity without just cause, as determined in a hearing by the
proper court, his immunity shall be removed and he shall be subject to contempt or It means verified and credible scientific methods which include the extraction of DNA
criminal prosecution. Moreover, the enjoyment of all rights and benefits under R.A. from biological samples, the generation of DNA profiles and the comparison of the
6981 shall be deemed terminated. The witness may, however, purge himself of the information obtained from the DNA testing of biological samples for the purpose of
contumacious acts by testifying at any appropriate stage of the proceedings (Sec. 13, determining, with reasonable certainty, whether or not the DNA obtained from two or
R.A. 6981). more distinct biological samples originates from the same person (direct identification)
or if the biological samples originate from related persons (Kinship Analysis).
If in a criminal case the accused pleads guilty, can he be convicted of the crime
charged? May DNA testing be conducted absent a prior court order?
No, corpus delicti req. sect 3 rule 133
YES. No need to present evidence on the part of the prosecution. Yes. The Rules on DNA Evidence does not preclude a DNA testing, without need of a
prior court order, at the behest of any party, including law enforcement agencies,
How may an accused change his plea? before a suit or proceeding is commenced (Sec. 4).

At any time before the judgment of conviction becomes final, the court may permit an What are the requisites for the issuance of a DNA testing order?
improvident plea of guilty to be withdrawn and be substituted by a plea of not guilty.
In pending actions, the appropriate court may, at any time issue a DNA testing order
Can the prosecutor make use of the withdrawn plea as an evidence against him? either motu proprio or upon application of any person who has a legal interest in the
matter in litigation after due hearing and notice to the parties and upon showing of 1. The samples are similar, and could have originated from the same source
the following: (Rule of Inclusion). In such a case, the analyst proceeds to determine the
requisites for the issuance of a DNA testing order statistical significance of the similarity.
1. A biological sample exists that is relevant to the case; 2. The samples are different hence it must have originated from different sources
2. The biological sample: (Rule of Exclusion). This conclusion is absolute and requires no further
3. was not previously subjected to the type of DNA testing now requested; or analysis;
4. was previously subjected to DNA testing, but the results may require 3. The test is inconclusive. This might occur due to degradation, contamination,
confirmation for good reasons; failure of some aspect of protocol, or some other reasons. Analysis might be
5. The DNA testing uses a scientifically valid technique; repeated to obtain a more conclusive result (People v. Vallejo, G.R. No.
6. The DNA testing has the scientific potential to produce new information that is 144656, May 9, 2002).
relevant to the proper resolution of the case; and
7. The existence of other factors, if any, which the court may consider as What should the courts consider in evaluating DNA testing results?
potentially affecting the accuracy or integrity of the DNA testing (Sec. 4).
1. The evaluation of the weight of matching DNA evidence or the relevance of
Is the order granting the DNA testing appealable? mismatching DNA evidence;
2. The results of the DNA testing in the light of the totality of the other evidence
No. An order granting the DNA testing shall be immediately executory and shall not presented in the case; and
be appealable. Any petition for certiorari initiated therefrom shall not, in any way, 3. DNA results that exclude the putative parent from paternity shall be
stay the implementation thereof, unless a higher court issues an injunctive order conclusive proof of non-paternity (Sec. 9)
(Sec. 5).
To whom is post-conviction DNA testing available?
During Alexis’ trial for rape with murder, the prosecution sought to introduce
DNA evidence against him, based on forensic laboratory matching of the Post-conviction DNA testing may be available, without need of prior court order, to the
materials found at the crime scene and Alexis’ hair and blood samples. Alexis’ prosecution or any person convicted by final and executory judgment.
counsel objected, claiming that DNA evidence is inadmissible because the
materials taken from Alexis were in violation of his constitutional right against What are the requisites for the applicability of the Post-conviction DNA testing?
self-incrimination as well as his right of privacy and personal integrity. Should
the DNA evidence be admitted or not? Reason. S1. Existing biological sample;
R2. Such sample is relevant to the case; and
The DNA evidence should be admitted. It is not in violation of the constitutional right R3. The testing would probably result in the reversal or modification of the
against self-incrimination or his right of privacy and personal integrity. The right judgment of conviction (Sec. 6).
against self-incrimination is applicable only to testimonial evidence. Extracting a
blood sample and cutting a strand from the hair of the accused are purely mechanical What is the remedy of the convict if the post-conviction DNA testing result is
acts that do not involve his discretion nor require his intelligence. favorable to him?

Is the result of DNA testing automatically admitted as evidence in the case in The convict or the prosecution may file a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the
which it was sought for? court of origin. In case the court, after due hearing, finds the petition to be
meritorious, it shall reverse or modify the judgment of conviction and order the
No. The grant of a DNA testing application shall not be construed as an automatic release of the convict, unless continued detention is justified for a lawful cause.
admission into evidence of any component of the DNA evidence that may be obtained
as a result thereof (Sec. 5). What should the courts consider in determining the probative value of DNA
evidence?
If a DNA test was conducted, what are the possible results that it may yield?
1. The chain of custody, including how the biological samples were collected, how
they were handled, and the possibility of contamination of the samples;
 1. The chain of custody, including how the biological samples were collected, how
they were handled, and the possibility of contamination of the samples;
2. The DNA testing methodology, including the procedure followed in analyzing Does the rule on post-conviction DNA testing violate the rule on immutability of
C the samples, the advantages and disadvantages of the procedure, and judgment?
M compliance with the scientifically valid standards in conducting the tests;
3. The forensic DNA laboratory, including accreditation by any reputable No. Once post-conviction testing turns out to be favorable to the accused, it has the
A standards-setting institution and the qualification of the analyst who
conducted the tests. If the laboratory is not accredited, the relevant experience
same effect as annulling the court’s judgment.

R of the laboratory in forensic casework and credibility shall be properly If that is the case, then why is the remedy a petition for Habeas Corpus? Why
established; and not an action for annulment of judgment under Rule 47?
4. The reliability of the testing result (Sec. 7).
An action for habeas corpus has the same effect as that of an action for annulment of
What are the things to be considered in assessing the probative value of DNA judgment. The difference is that according to Jara, Rule 47 is only available to civil
evidence? cases. Habeas Corpus may be availed of in criminal cases.
HEARSAY EVIDENCE
1. How the samples are collected;
2. How they were handled; What is Sec. 36?
3. The possibility of the contamination of the samples;
4. The procedure followed in analyzing the samples; A witness can testify only to those facts which he knows of his personal knowledge;
5. Whether the proper standards and procedures were followed in conducting the that is, which are derived from his own perception, except as otherwise provided in
tests; and these rules.
6. The qualification of the analyst who conducted the tests. (Ibid.)
Are there any exceptions to the hearsay rule?
What are the things to be considered in evaluating whether or not the DNA
testing methodology is reliable? 1. dying declaration
2. declaration against interest
1. The falsifiability of the principles or methods used, that is, whether the theory 3. act or declaration about pedigree
or technique can be and has been tested; 4. family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree
2. the subjection to peer review and publication of the principles or methods; 5. common reputation
3. The general acceptance of the principles or methods by the relevant scientific 6. res gestae
community; 7. entries in the ordinary course of business
4. The existence and maintenance of standards and controls to ensure the 8. entries in official records
correctness of data generated; 9. commercial lists
5. The existence of an appropriate reference population database; and 10. learned treatises
6. The general degree of confidence attributed to mathematical calculations used 11. testimony or deposition at a former proceeding
in comparing DNA profiles and the significance and limitation of statistical 12. Sec. 28 of the Rules on Examination of a Child Witness
calculations used in comparing DNA profiles. 13. Rule 8 of the Rules on Electronic Evidence

What Kind of Evidence is DNA Evidence? Can a documentary evidence be hearsay?

It can be object, documentary, or testimonial, depending on what you present in YES. The one who knows the contents of the document must testify in court and must
court. It is not exclusively classifiable. have personal knowledge of the facts stated therein.

In post-conviction DNA testing, what does “conviction” mean? When a document is presented in court, there is a presumption that someone has
prepared the said document. In order to properly submit the same, the person who
Conviction means a person has been convicted by final judgment. Even if he is prepared it or who had a part in the execution of the said document must testify as to
already sentenced by final judgment, he may still avail of such remedy. the contents of the same. If it the said document was merely presented to the court
without giving the adverse party any opportunity to cross examine the person who
prepared or who was part of the preparation of the said document, then the same Yes. There is still hearsay evidence if the witness testifies according to his own
document constitutes hearsay evidence. personal knowledge, BUT his testimony was not subjected to cross-examination.

Is hearsay evidence relevant? Why should we exclude such relevant evidence? NOTE: If failure of the witness to return to court is due to the act of the adverse party,
then such testimony does not become hearsay.
Hearsay evidence is relevant because it may have a reasonable tendency to prove the
facts in issue. However, it is not competent; it is expressly excluded by the Rules. The What is the Rule on Independently Relevant Statements? Is it hearsay?
reason for its exclusion is the absence of the opportunity to cross-examine the witness
testifying before the court. The veracity of the facts cannot be tested. The doctrine provides that a witness ma testify to the statements made by a person if,
Opportunity to cross-examine for instance, the fact that such statements were made by the latter would indicate the
latter’s mental state or physical condition. Such statements are relevant since the
What are the two aspects of hearsay evidence? statements made are the very facts in issue or circumstantial evidence of the facts in
issue.
1. Testimonial evidence that was not derived from personal knowledge; It is not hearsay evidence. It may have certain characteristics of hearsay, but its
2. Testimony of a witness that may be derived from personal knowledge but did application is not hearsay. It is DIRECT EVIDENCE.
not give the adverse party an opportunity to cross-examine the witness.
What are the different classifications of Independently Relevant Statements?
Can you not cross-examine the witness who offered the hearsay evidence?
1. Those statements which are the very facts in issue; and
YES. OPINION (HPM): In fact, you can ask anything during cross examination 2. Those statements which are circumstantial evidence of the facts in issue.
(generally, we follow the ENGLISH RULE), therefore, there is nothing wrong if you
cross-examine the witness. You can cross-examine him on how he acquired the Does the hearsay rule apply to summary procedure? Is there an opportunity to
hearsay knowledge, or those independently relevant statements. See also the cross-examine in summary procedure?
purposes of cross-examination, and it does not only include testing the truthfulness
of the statement but also to discredit the witness. Hence, even if the testimony is YES. Although in both civil and criminal cases the direct testimonies of the witnesses
hearsay, you can attack the credibility of the witness during cross-examination. shall be contained in their affidavits, the accused in criminal cases covered by
However, it is submitted that once you cross-examine a witness who testified on Summary Procedure has the right to cross-examine the witnesses. However, no such
hearsay, the adverse party is deemed to have waived his right to object on its right is available to the parties in civil cases. But see Sec. 20 of the Rule on Summary
admissibility. The objection must be raised during the direct exam, hence, if the Procedure (which is applicable to both civil and criminal) such that, hearsay
counsel was able to object, then there is no necessity for him to cross-examine. statement shall subject witness to disciplinary proceedings and expunge the
statements off the record.
OPINION (IPL): You could cross-examine the witness who offered the hearsay
testimony. WHAT YOU CANNOT CROSS-EXAMINE IS THE PERSON WHO MADE THE
OUT-OF-COURT STATEMENT. That is the problem the hearsay rule wants to address.
People vs. Cloud
It is because of the above reason that if the affiants of affidavits do not take the
witness stand to affirm their averments in their affidavits, such affidavits must be At around 11:00 o’clock in the morning on August 2, 1988 while a certain Mrs.
excluded from the judicial proceeding, being inadmissible hearsay. Josephine Aguilar was at the emergency room of St. Luke’s Hospital, Quezon City to
have some stitches removed from her daughter’s head her attention was called by a
limpid boy being carried by a man followed by an old woman who was shouting
hysterically. The boy is John Albert Cloud. She noticed that the face of the boy was
Supposing it is the other way around? If it is the witness who testifies according swollen and bruised and his body covered with dry blood. A nurse commented that
to his own personal knowledge? Is it possible that it can be hearsay? (Jara 2004 the little boy – not more than three years old – must have been hit by a truck (tsn, J.
Notes) Aguilar, June 21, 1993, pp. 7-10, 14-15, 33).
But the words of the old woman – the lola - of the little boy, showed the cause of the
injury to be otherwise for she was repeatedly saying in a potpourri of cries and tears: Who was the Ponente?
“Pinatay siya nf sariling ama!” The old woman told the people inside the Emergency
Room that the boy’s father – Robert Cloud – wouldn’t allow John Albert to come with Justice Regalado
her and when the boy started to cry and wouldn’t stop crying his father began to beat
the boy hard, tied his hands, and made “tusok, tusok” in his body. The father The decision made use of independently relevant statements. How?
continued beating the boy even when excrements were already coming out from the
boy’s anus (tsn. J Aguilar, June 21, 1993, pp. 12-13, 22). The witness in this case testified as to the fact that a certain old lady was screaming
invectives against a person who allegedly killed his son.
The male companion of the boy said to the old woman: “Hoy, tigil ka na!” “Wag kang
maingay.” And told the people at E.R.: “Sira and ulo ng matanda, eh!” (tsn, J Aguilar,
July 12, 1993, pp. 8-9). But the old woman wouldn’t stop and continued to say:
“Putang-ina ang ama niya . . . Hayop siya!” Does that mean that the prosecution can convict a person of a serious crime
using only circumstantial evidence?
When the doctor pronounced the boy dead the old woman knelt before him and cried
like (Ix)ion (tsn, J. Aguilar, June 21, 1993, p. 10). His baptismal certificate says that YES, provided that:
John Albert was born on October 2, 1987 to Janet Villagracia and John Robert Cloud
(Exh. ‘3’). 1. there is more than one circumstance;
2. the facts from which the inferences are derived are proven; and
The ear-piercing would probably have ended there but for the fact that Mrs. Aguilar’s 3. the combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce a conviction
conscience was bothered by what she saw and heard as narrated above and decided beyond reasonable doubt.
to do something about it. She approached Atty. Remedios Balbin, Chairman in
Quezon City of a civil liberties organization. Atty. Balbin, after a few weeks of What do you mean by the term ante litem motam?
research found out that Robert Cloud and family left his house at No. 69 San Isidro
Street, barangay Sto. Niño, Quezon City[;] the boy’s body was brought to Rey Funeral In cases applicable, the statement must be prior to the controversy, but according to
Homes[;] Dr. E. Cacas certified that the cause of death of John Albert Cloud is CJ Moran, it means that it must not only be prior to the suit but prior to any
broncho pneumonia with heart complications (exh. D-48) [;] and that the autopsy on controversy even if a suit has not yet been instituted.
the cadaver was waived by Natividad Calpito Cloud who claimed to be the boy’s
mother per her “Affidavit” dated August 3, 1988 (Exh. “D-47). Atty Balbin thereafter What is the concept of a dying declaration?
contacted the NBI and requested for the exhumation of the boy’s cadaver.
The declaration of a dying person, made under the consciousness of an impending
Issue: WON the statements of Josephine Aguilar are admissible as evidence. death, may be received in any case wherein his death is the subject of inquiry, as
evidence of the cause and surrounding circumstances of such death.
Held: Yes. The trial court was of the opinion that what Ms. Aguilar heard or saw does
not merely constitute an independently relevant statement which it considered as an Can we apply this to a criminal case? How about a civil case (HOW)?
“exception to the hearsay rule, only as to the tenor rather than the intrinsic truth or
falsity of its contents.”[18] We will clarify this. Insofar as the statements of Rufina Commonly applicable to criminal cases since the subject of the statement is the death
Alconyes are concerned, they are admissible as part of the res gestae they having been of the declarant. However, it is applicable to civil cases when the subject matter of the
caused by and did result from the startling, if not gruesome, occurrence that she cases involves the death of the declarant, or that the death is a vital issue in the civil
witnessed; and these were shortly thereafter uttered by her with spontaneity, without case.
prior opportunity to contrive the same. The report made thereof by Josephine Aguilar
is not hearsay since she was actually there and personally heard the statements of As long as the relevance is clear, a dying declaration may now be introduced in a
Alconyes which she recounted in court. Her account of said statements of Alconyes criminal or a civil action and the relevance is satisfied when the subject of the inquiry
are admissible under the doctrine of Aindependently relevant statements, with respect is the death of the declarant himself.
to the tenor and not the truth thereof, since independent of the truth or falsity of the
same they are relevant to the issue on the cause of the death of the victim. Must a dying declaration be in writing?
 3. The serious nature of his wounds as would necessarily engender a belief on
NO. The Revised Rules on Evidence do not require that a dying declaration must be his part that he would not survive therefrom.
made in writing to be admissible. Indeed, to impose such a requirement would be to
exclude many statements from a victim in extremis for want of paper and pen at the Can a dying declaration be used if the crime charged is Rape with Homicide?
critical moment (People v. Viovicente, G.R. No. 118707).
Only as to the death, i.e., the facts surrounding the death, but not the facts
Why is it exempted? surrounding the rape.

Necessity and trustworthiness. Jara: if the declarant says that he/she was raped, and subsequently dies, that cannot
be considered a dying declaration.
What is the legal maxim that is usually quoted?
What if the victim does not die?
Truth sits on the lips of the dying man.
Always remember DEATH IS AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT. Why? If the declarant is alive,
What if the defense presents evidence that the declarant during his lifetime is a he can testify in court personally. It will not be considered as a dying declaration, but
congenital liar? Is that a good strategy on the part of the defense? nevertheless, it may be admissible as part of a res gestae

NO. That is not a good defense. It will not even have any effect at all. The rule on What if victim dies only after three (3) months?
dying declarations does not require that the declarant be one of proven honesty. For
as long as the essential elements of a dying declaration is present, the same may be As long as he believed that he is going to die.
admitted in evidence.
What is s declaration against interest?
Essential Elements/Requisites of a dying declaration?
The declaration made by a person deceased, or unable to testify, against the interest
Requisites: of the declarant, if the fact asserted in the declaration was at the time it was made so
far contrary to declarant’s own interest, that a reasonable man in his position would
1. That death is imminent and the declarant is conscious of that fact; not have made the declaration unless he believed it to be true.
2. That the declaration refers to the cause and the surrounding circumstances of
such death; Requisites?
3. That the declaration relates to the facts which the victim is competent to
testify to; 1. That the declarant is dead or unable to testify;
4. That the declaration is offered in a case wherein the declarant‘s death is 2. That it relates to a fact against the interests of the declarant;
subject of the inquiry (the victim necessarily must have died); 3. That at the time he made said declaration the declarant was aware that it was
5. That the statement is complete in itself (People v. De Joya, G.R. No. 75028, contrary to his aforesaid interest; and
November 8, 1991); and 4. That the declarant had no motive to falsify and he believed such declaration to
6. The declarant should have died. be true.

How do you prove to the court that the statements were made under the
consciousness of an impending death? Distinction of declaration against interest vs. admission?

A declaration will be deemed as having been made under the consciousness of Admissions against interest are those made by a party to a litigation or by one in
imminent death, in consideration of: privity with or identified in legal interest with such party, and are admissible whether
or not the declarant is available as a witness. Declarations against interest are those
1. The words or statements of the declarant on the same occasion; made by a person who is neither a part nor in privity with a party to the suit, are
2. His conduct at the time the declaration is made; secondary evidence, but constitute an exception to the hearsay rule, and are
admissible only when the declarant is unavailable as a witness.
 evidence his
Give an example of a declaration against interest. relationship to the
family.
Make sure to give an example both for a criminal case and a civil case, and remember
na dapat kumpleto lahat ng elements. Give an example.

What are the evidenciary Rules on Pedigree? Just give an example regarding your family, para mas medaling idefend. He grills a lot
of students in examples.
SEC. 39. Act or declaration about pedigree.—The act or declaration of a person
deceased, or unable to testify, in respect to the pedigree of another person related to When were you born? Is that hearsay? So if it is hearsay, when you state that in
him by birth or marriage, may be received in evidence where it occurred before the court, the court will not believe you?
controversy, and the relationship between the two persons is shown by evidence other
than such act or declaration. The word "pedigree" includes relationship, family the fact that you know your date of birth does not come from your own personal
genealogy, birth, marriage, death, the dates when and the places where these facts knowledge because at the time you were born you were completely ignorant or
occurred, and the names of the relatives. It embraces also facts of family history innocent. In fact, your information of your birth is derived from another source.
intimately connected with pedigree. Nevertheless, the information regarding your birth is admissible for the convenience of
everybody. It is a matter of necessity.
SEC. 40. Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree.— The reputation or
tradition existing in a family previous to the controversy, in respect to the pedigree of The birth certificate is also hearsay evidence, but because it is a public document.
any one of its members, may be received in evidence if the witness testifying thereon Documents consisting of entries in public records made in the performance of a duty
be also a member of the family, either by consanguinity or affinity. Entries in family by a public officer are prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated. All other public
bibles or other family books or charts, engraving on rings, family portraits and the documents are evidence, even against a third person, of the fact which gave rise to
like, may be received as evidence of pedigree. their execution and of the date of the latter.

Basis for admitting such evidence

Distinctions between Sec. 39 and Sec. 40.
Necessity and Trustworthiness
Sec. 39 Sec. 40
Act or declaration Family reputation or
about pedigree. tradition regarding
pedigree.
Declarant is Declarant is the What is the rule on Res Gestae?
deceased or unable witness himself.
to testify. Statements made by a person while a startling occurrence is taking place or
immediately prior or subsequent thereto with respect to the circumstances thereof,
Witness need not be Witness is a member may be given in evidence as part of the res gestae. So, also, statements accompanying
a member of the of the family. an equivocal act material to the issue, and giving it a legal significance, may be
family. received as part of the res gestae.
Relation of the The witness is
declarant and the himself the one to Why are they hearsay?
person subject of the whom the fact
inquiry must be relates, it is not Because the one testifying in court is not the one who made the declaration.
established by necessary for him to
independent establish by Why do we admit them?
evidence independent
Necessity and Trustworthiness. There are other declarations which are admitted as or seriousness of the startling occurrence. If the statements were made while the
original evidence, being distinguished from hearsay by their connection with the nervous excitement was still working on the declarant’s mind, they are admissible;
principal fact under investigation. The affairs of men consist of a complication of otherwise, they are not.
circumstances so intimately inter-woven as to be hardly separable from each other.
How does one determine the spontaneity of the occurrence?
They are trustworthy because the statements are made instinctively, while the
declarant’s mental power for deliberation in concocting matters are controlled and 1. Lapse of time between the act and the declaration relating to it;
stilled by the shocking influence of a startling occurrence, so that all his utterances at 2. Whether there was an opportunity for fabrication or a likelihood of it;
the time are the reflex product of immediate sensual impressions, unaided by 3. The mental and physical condition of the declarant and the character of the
retrospective mental action. Necessity, because such natural and spontaneous occurrence;
utterances are more convincing than the testimony of the same person on the stand. 4. The nature and form of the declaration.

What are verbal acts?

Different classifications of Res Gestae Declarations
Statements accompanying an equivocal act material to the issue and giving it a legal
Verbal Acts Spontaneous Statements significance. Statements accompanying and explaining that act made by or to the
The res gestae is the equivocal act. The res gestae is the startling occurrence. person doing it may be proved if they are becessary to understand it.
Verbal act must be contemporaneous with Statements may be made prior, or
or must accompany the equivocal act. immediately after the startling What are the requisites for verbal acts to be admissible?
occurrence.
1. There must be an equivocal act;
2. The equivocal act must be material to the issue;
3. The statement in question muset be necessary to understand the equivocal
act; and
What are Spontaneous statements? 4. The statement must accompany the equivocal act.

Statements made by a person while a startling occurrence is taking place, or What is an equivocal act?
immediately prior or subsequent thereto, with respect to the circumstances thereof.
JARA: it is an act that is capable of different interpretations. In other words, pwedeng
What is the concept of a startling occurrence? lagyan ng kulay yung mga ginawa mo. Pwedeng may ibang kahulugan. You thought
that because sobrang bait ni boylaloo/girlaloo sa iyo eh kayo na (ano yun caritas?)
As it is essential that the statements be natural and spontaneous, unreflected and
instinctive, it is also essential that they should have been caused by something It is only when the thing done is equivocal that it is competent to prove the
startling enough to produce nervous excitement, and to keept the will dormant so far declarations accompanying it as falling within the cases of res gestae. What a person
as any deliberation in concocting matters for speech or selecting words is concerned. says that is explanatory of an equivocal or ambiguous act which he is then doing, or
situation which he is then occupying – as that of a person in possession of property –
Example? may be proved as re s gestae.

A murder, a suicide, a railroad accident and the like. What are entries in Official Record?

What if the statements were made for some period after the startling occurrence Entries made in official records made in the performance of his duty by a public
took place? officer of the Philippines, or by a person in the performance of a duty specially enjoyed
by law.
Experience shows that a startling occurrence may extend its exciting influence over a
subsequent period of time which may be long or short according to the relative gravity Are the items recorded in the birth certificate considered hearsay?
YES, but they are considered as an exception. d. Impressions of the emotion, behavior, condition or appearance of a
person.
Why is a birth certificate trustworthy?
What are the requisites for an Expert Opinion to be admissible?
Nobody’s interested with the birth of a person. Jara: You might just be another bitch
in this world. Furthermore, the law makes it clear that they are prima facie evidence 1. That the fact to be proved is one requiring expert;
of the facts stated therein. 2. That the witness is really an expert.

If a mother contradicts the date alleged in the birth certificate, what should be What are the Daubert and Frye standards?
given greater probative weight?
Frye Standard
Birth certificate. See Sec. 23, Rule 132.
Frye involved the admissibility of opinion evidence based upon the use of an early
When are business records excepted from the rule of hearsay evidence under the version of the Polygraph. The D.C. Circuit Court held that scientific evidence was
rules on Electronic Evidence? admissible if it was based on a scientific technique generally accepted as reliable in
the scientific community. Thus, Expert Testimony was admitted based on the expert's
The hearsay rule is inapplicable if the following requisites are present: credentials, experience, skill, and reputation. The theory was that deficiencies or flaws
1. A memorandum, report, record or data compilation of acts, events, conditions, in the expert's conclusions would be exposed through cross-examination. This
opinions, or diagnoses, decision became known as the Frye test or the general-acceptance test. By the 1990s,
2. Made by electronic, optical, or other similar means, the Frye test had become the majority view in federal and state courts for the
3. At or near the time of or from transmission or supply of information, admissibility of new or unusual scientific evidence, even in view of Federal Rule of
4. By a person with knowledge thereof, Evidence 702, passed in 1975, which some courts believed to provide a more flexible
5. And kept in the regular course or conduct of a business activity, test for admissibility of opinion testimony by expert witnesses.
6. And such was the regular practice to make such memorandum or report,
7. All of which are shown by the testimony of the custodian or other qualified Daubert - Kumho Standard:
witness (Sec. 1, Rule 8, REE).
In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court changed
OPINION AND CHARACTER EVIDENCE the standard for admissibility of expert testimony. Under Daubert, a trial judge has a
duty to scrutinize evidence more rigorously to determine whether it meets the
What is the Opinion Rule? requirements of Federal Rule of Evidence 702. This rule states, "If scientific, technical,
or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence
As a rule, the opinion of a witness is inadmissible because when a witness testifies, a or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill,
witness does so with respect to facts personally observed by him and it is for the court experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or
to draw conclusions from the facts testified to. otherwise, if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony
is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the
Are there any exceptions? principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case."
In Daubert, the Court stated that evidence based on innovative or unusual scientific
1. The opinion of a witness regarding a matter requiring special knowledge, skill, knowledge may be admitted only after it has been established that the evidence is
experience or training which he is shown to possess, may be received in reliable and scientifically valid. The Court also imposed a gatekeeping function on trial
evidence. judges by charging them with preventing "junk science" from entering the courtroom
2. The opinion of a witness for which proper basis is given, may be received in as evidence. To that end, Daubert outlined four considerations: testing, peer review,
evidence regarding: error rates, and acceptability in the relevant scientific community. These four tests for
a. The identity of a person about whom he has adequate knowledge; reliability are known as the Daubert factors or the Daubert test.
b. A handwriting with which he has sufficient familiarity;
c. The mental sanity of a person with whom he is sufficiently acquainted; In 1999, the U.S. Supreme Court significantly broadened that test and the trial
court's gatekeeping role to include expert testimony based on technical and other
specialized knowledge. Kumho Tire Co., Ltd. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137, 119 S.Ct.
1167, 143 L.Ed. 2d 238 (U.S. Mar 23, 1999) (NO. 97-1709). In Kumho, the Court held (b) In Civil Cases:
that the gatekeeping obligation imposed upon trial judges by Daubert applies to
scientific testimony as well as to expert opinion testimony. In order to meet its Evidence of the moral character of a party in a civil case is admissible only when
gatekeeping obligation, a trial court may use the criteria identified in Daubert only pertinent to the issue of character involved in the case.
when they can be applied to determine the reliability of either the underlying scientific
technique or the expert's conclusions. But inasmuch as the Daubert gatekeeping (c) In the case provided for in Rule 132, Section 14.
function is meant to be a flexible one, it must necessarily be tied to the particular
facts of a case. Thus, the factors identified in Daubert do not constitute an exhaustive What is Character in the first place?
checklist or a definitive litmus test.
Character means the peculiar qualities impressed by nature or by habit on a person
Are the said standards important in our jurisdiction? which distinguishes him from others; these constitute his real character. In other
words, it means the aggregate of a person’s traits, including those relating to care and
We do not apply these standards in this jurisdiction. In the US, these standards are skill and their opposites.
used with regard to the admissibility of scientific evidence. See Rule on DNA Evidence,
which uses the standards to determine the probative value of DNA evidence and not In a case for Estafa, is the character of the accused relevant?
to its admissibility, because in our jurisdiction admissibility is determined by the
axioms of admissibility. See also the case of Rosendo C. Herrrera v. CA See Sec. 51(a). The good character of an accused is admissible in evidence to show the
improbability of his doing the act charged. The principle upon which good character
How do you qualify an expert witness? maybe proved is, that it affords presumption against the commission of a crime.

In Presenting an Expert Witness: Why don’t we just follow the axiom of relevancy? Why do we exclude character?

1. Introduce and qualify the witness; The evidence of a person’s character does not prove that such person acted in
2. Let him give his factual testimony, if he has knowledge of the facts; conformity with such character or trait in a particular occasion.
3. Begin the hypothetical question by asking him to assume certain facts as true;
4. Conclude the question, by, first asking the expert if he has an opinion on a Even if it is merely circumstantial, can’t we not admit it based on the two
certain point assuming that these facts are true and secondly, asking him, axioms?
after he has answered affirmatively, to give his opinion on the point;
5. After he has stated his opinion, ask him to give his reasons. OPINION: The Rule provides for the instances where character evidence may be
presented. So think. When are you going to admit character evidence?
What is the rule on Character Evidence?
What moral trait is involved in swindling?
SEC. 51. Character evidence not generally admissible; exceptions:—
Honesty.
(a) In Criminal Cases:
Why is the accused allowed to prove his character right away while the
(1) The accused may prove his good moral character which is pertinent to the moral prosecution cannot avail of the same privilege?
trait involved in the offense charged.
On the part of the prosecution, the purpose is to prevent a pronouncement of guilt not
(2) Unless in rebuttal, the prosecution may not prove his bad moral character which because there exist sufficient evidence of his guilt, but because he is a bad man.
is pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense charged.
The reason for the rule is that evidence of bad character may create an unfair
(3) The good or bad moral character of the offended party may be proved if it tends to prejudice against the accused who may be convicted not because he is guilty of the
establish in any reasonable degree the probability or improbability of the offense crime charged, but because of his being a crooked man.
charged.
How is character evidence offered? In other words, what are the evidences that
may be used in order to prove the character of a person? Distinguish Burden of Proof from Burden of Evidence.

The best rule founded on sound logic and wise experience is that the character of a Burden of Proof Burden of Evidence
person may be proved by: It is the duty of a party to present It is the duty of a party to provide
evidence on the facts in issue necessary evidence at any stage of the trial until he
1. Evidence of reputation; to establish his claim or defense by the has established a prima facie case, or
2. By witnesses who know him personally; and amount of evidence required by law (Sec. the like duty of the adverse party to
3. In some instances by evidence of particular acts of said person from which his 1, Rule 131) meet and overthrow that prima facie
character may be inferred. case thus established. In both civil and
criminal cases, the burden of evidence
Can we use testimonial evidence? lies on the party who asserts an
affirmative allegation.
YES.
Does not shift as it remains throughout Shifts to the other party when one party
Should the witness belong to the same community as the accused? the entire case exactly where the has produced sufficient evidence to be
pleadings originally placed it entitled to a ruling in his favor
YES. As Justice Berry said: “As it is the fact of disposition which is important and
material, there can be no reason why this fact may not be proved by any witness who
knows what it is. There is certainly no reason why general repute is any better or
more satisfactory evidence of disposition than the testimony of one who knows that Generally determined by the pleadings Generally determined by the
the disposition is from his personal observation.” filed by the party; and whoever asserts developments at the trial, or by the
the affirmative of the issue has the provisions of the substantive law or
If a person is presented to prove the common reputation, is he not offering a burden of proof procedural rules which may relieve the
conclusion? party from presenting evidence on the
fact alleged
No. It is merely the opinion of the community.

Can the accused offer witness to prove that he has not defaulted in his previous
transactions, and thereby prove that he did not commit estafa?

No. He cannot prove particular instances. What he must prove is his reputation as
It does not shift the burden of proof. It creates a prima facie case and thereby
perceived by the community.
However, the one who has the burden of sustains the said burden of evidence on
proof is relieved from the time being, the point which it covers, shifting it to
BURDEN OF PROOF AND PRESUMPTIONS
from introducing evidence in support of the other party. It relieves those favored
his averment because the presumption thereby of the burden of proving the fact
Burden of Proof; Definition?
stands in the place of evidence. presumed.
Burden of proof is the duty of a party to present evidence on the facts in issue
necessary to establish his claim or defense by the amount of evidence required by law. Who has the burden of proof? With respect to the defendant, is it possible that
he has the burden of proof?
What are the two concepts of burden of proof?
General Rule: In civil cases, the plaintiff has the burden of proof; and in criminal
1. Burden of going forward – Party’s obligation of producing evidence. cases, it is the prosecution because innocence is presumed.
2. Burden of persuasion – The burden of persuading the trier of fact that the
burdened party is entitled to prevail.
Exception: In civil cases, burden of proof is on the defendant if he raises affirmative be restored to the possession thereof and that the defendant render an account of the
defenses. property which he had received and which was retained by him, and for other relief.

Why do we distinguish between negative and affirmative defenses in a civil Issue: WON defendant has the right over the properties mentioned.
case? Can we apply the same distinctions in a criminal case?
Held: None. As to the defendant, Ramirez, it appears that he took possession of the
Because if the defendant raises affirmative defenses, he has the burden of proof. In property as the servant or agent of the plaintiff. The only right which he had to the
criminal cases, there is no need to distinguish since the accused is always presumed possession at the time he took it, was the right which was given to him by the
innocent. Burden shifts if def. claims self def. plaintiff, and he took possession under the agreement to return that possession
whenever it should be demanded of him. Under such circumstances he will not be
Reverse order of trial is possible in both civil and criminal cases. How can the allowed, when the return of such possession is demanded by him the plaintiff, to say
reverse order of trial take place if we do not allow the court to inquire as to the that the plaintiff is not the owner of the property and is not entitled to have it
defenses of the accused’s offer of a not guilty plea? delivered back to him. The principle of law that a tenant can not deny his landlord’s
title, which is found in section 333, paragraph 2, of the Code of Civil Procedure, and
If the accused raises justifying or exempting circumstances, the burden of evidence is also in the Spanish law, is applicable to a case of this kind. An answer of the
shifted, and he must prove the existence of these circumstances. defendant, Ramirez, in which he alleged that he himself was the owner of the property
at the time he received it from the plaintiff, or in which he alleged that the pueblo was
In civil cases, reverse trial is allowed when the party raises an affirmative defense. the owner of the property at that time, would constitute no defense. There is no claim
made by him that since the delivery of the possession of the property to him by the
Reverse order of trial in civil cases – can the defendant stipulate in the pre-trial plaintiff he has acquired the title thereto by other means, nor does he is own behalf
to change the order of trial even if he raises mere negative defenses in his make any claim whatever either to the property or to the possession thereof.
pleading?
Important matters to discuss in the case:
Generally no. However, see Sec. 5, Rule 30 wherein the court may, for special
circumstances, allow modifications in the order of trial. 1. Why did the Court choose the estoppel by deed presumption?
2. Why not estoppel in pais?
Can the same principle be applied in a criminal case? 3. Was there a tenant-landlord relationship in this case?

NO. because such would violate his right to be informed of the nature of the offense What happened in Vales vs. Villa?
charged against him which is contained in the information.
Facts: This is an action to set aside certain transfers of real estate from the plaintiff to
What happened in Barlin vs. Ramirez? one of the defendants and to require that defendant to recover by good and sufficient
conveyance the title to such properties; to refund to the plaintiff a certain sum paid by
The defendant, Ramirez, having been appointed by the plaintiff parish priest, took plaintiff for the recovery of certain other real estate; and for an accounting by the
possession of the church on 7/5/01. He administered if as such under the orders of defendants of the rents, issues and profits of certain real estate during a certain
his superiors until 11/14/02. His successor having been then appointed, the latter period; and for P25,000 damages.
made a demand on this defendant for the delivery to him of the church, convent, and
cemetery, and the sacred ornaments, books, jewels, money, and other prop. of the The action has been erroneously described in appellant's brief as one to annul a series
church. The defendant, by a written document of that date, refused to make such of real estate transactions on the ground of duress. More correctly this is an action to
delivery, stating that "the town of Lagonoy, in conjunction w/ the parish priest of compel the defendants to account unto the plaintiff for the proceeds of a series of
thereof, has seen fit to sever connection w/ the Pope at Rome and his representatives frauds practiced upon said plaintiff.
in these Islands, and to join the Filipino Church, the head of w/c is at Manila.
Issue: WON there is existence of fraud.
The plaintiff brought this action against defendant, alleging in his amended complaint
that the Roman Catholic Church was the owner of the church bldg, the convent, Held: It is well recognized however, that a mere failure to live up to a contract is not
cemetery, the books, money, and other property belonging thereto, and asking that it fraudulent or deceitful. The furthest the authorities have gone along this line, and not
all have gone that far, is to declare that if, at the time a contract is made, one of the agreement to reconvey on the repayment of the consideration named in the
parties has present in his mind the purpose and intent to break it, after getting all he instrument and that defendants made use of the fact that the agreement was verbal
can out of the other party, and that purpose and intent enter into a the contract as and, therefore, difficult to prove, as clever by which they forced him to convey to them
the main element or consideration thereof on his part, there is fraud and deceit, the additional properties before they would comply with the verbal agreement. According
authorities holding that the state of mind of the party is a fact entering into the to plaintiff's contention, then, each one of the conveyances between him and
consideration of the contract without which it would not have been made; and that, defendants subsequent to the original conveyance was an extortion, using that word
by virtue of that state of mind, the other party was deprived of property. That fact in its popular and not in its legal sense, the defendants, in order to intimidate him
however must be alleged and proved and relied upon before it can be utilized by the and thereby obtain the conveyance, threatening him with a refusal to comply with the
person asserting its existence. It was not alleged or proved in this case and plaintiff verbal agreement to reconvey and the consequent loss of his properties. At each
does not rely upon it in his brief in this court. His consent was not obtained by deceit conveyance the defendants agreed, always verbally, as a consideration therefor, to
in any of the transactions. There did not exist in any one of the transactions reconvey to him the properties remaining, but each time refused to do so and
complained of a condition where "by words and insidious machinations on the part of proceeded, after each such conveyance, to a fresh extortion. It is contended that
one of the contracting parties the other is (was) induced to execute a contract which, plaintiff, by not incorporating the verbal agreement to reconvey in the instrument
without them, he would not have made." itself, placed himself in a disadvantageous position; and that he executed and
delivered the subsequent conveyances for the purpose of extricating himself from the
Reduced to the lowest terms this action constitutes an attempt on the part of the unfortunate situation so produced. The ultimate extortion, the payment of P6,800 to
plaintiff to extricate himself from a series of foolish transactions, if we may accept his recover the remaining properties, was the last penalty which he paid for his mistake
allegations respecting them. As we have said, the sales were all made by the plaintiff in not incorporating the verbal agreement in the conveyance itself.
with full knowledge of the facts and there appears nothing in the record which
warrants a rescission of them from the standpoint of fraud. The ultimate purpose of All men are presumed to be sane and normal and subject to be moved by
the action is the recovery of the properties described in the deed of March 22, 1909, substantially the same motives. When of age and sane, they must take care of
remaining unsold. But, as appears from the evidence, the plaintiff has already themselves. In their relation with others in the business of life, wits, sense,
recovered those properties, having purchased them from the defendants on April l4, intelligence, training, ability and judgment meet and clash and contest, sometimes
1913, for P6,800. Before this action was begun, therefore, plaintiff had obtained the with gain and advantage to all, sometimes to a few only, with loss and injury to
very thing which he had been seeking to recover all through thus dealings with others. In these contests men must depend upon themselves — upon their own
defendants and to obtain which he claims he had suffered so much. Having secured abilities, talents, training, sense, acument, judgment. The fact that one may be
before this action was begun precisely what defendants had promised him and the worsted by another, of itself, furnishes no cause of complaint. One man cannot
very thing he sought, there remains nothing further to be said or done in that complain because another is more able, or better trained, or has better sense of
connection. Certainly the repurchase of the properties which he so much desired was judgment than he has; and when the two meet on a fair field the inferior cannot
not procured by fraud or deceit; and it was a complete termination of the relations murmur if the battle goes against him. The law furnishes no protection to the inferior
existing between the parties arising out of the properties which he claimed were sold simply because he is inferior, any more than it protects the strong because he is
with a right to repurchase. After having obtained the very thing he desired and having strong. The law furnishes protection to both alike — to one or more or less than to the
done so in a manner which he deemed best and most suitable under the other. It makes no distinction between the wise and the foolish, the great and the
circumstances, did he not thereby terminate all relations between himself and small, the strong and the weak. The foolish may lose all they have to the wise; but
defendants with respect to, or growing out of those properties, and can he nor that does not mean that the law will give it back to them again. Courts cannot follow
repudiate not only the transaction by which he recovered them but also every other one every step of his life and extricate him from bad bargains, protect him from
transaction which he claims related thereto? It is incomprehensible, from a legal point unwise investments, relieve him from one-sided contracts, or annul the effects of
of view, that plaintiff, having been deprived of property by fraud and deceit, may foolish acts. Courts cannot constitute themselves guardians of persons who are not
recover that property through a voluntary agreement between him and those who legally incompetent. Courts operate not because one person has been defeated or
deceived and defrauded him, and then repudiate not only the transaction in which he overcome by another, but because he has been defeated or overcome illegally. Men
was defrauded of that property but also the very transaction by which he recovered it. may do foolish things, make ridiculous contracts, use miserable judgment, and lose
money by them — indeed, all they have in the world; but not for that alone can the
Dealing with the case from the standpoint of intimidation, it should be noted of March law intervene and restore. There must be, in addition, a violation of law, the
22, 1909, was obtained in that form by force or thereat. The validity of that commission of what the law knows as an actionable wrong, before the courts are
conveyance is admitted; as is also the fact that the verbal agreement to reconvey was authorized to lay hold of the situation and remedy it.
omitted from the conveyance knowingly. The claim is simply that there was a verbal
Furthermore, even if an actionable wrong be committed in such manner as to From these considerations it is clear that every case of alleged intimidation must be
authorize the courts to intervene, the person injured may renounce his right to take examined to determine within which class it falls. If it is within the first class it is not
the matter to the courts and may compromise with the wrong-doer. Or, having been duress in law, if it falls in the second, it is.
placed in a very disadvantageous position by the wrong committed against him, he
may be offered by his adversary one or more avenues of escape. He may be required to But into whichever class it falls the party coerced may, as we have seen, waive his
lose more property to his enemy or go to the courts for redress. In such case the right to annul the contract and to recover damages. He may do this expressly or
payment of an additional sum as a means of escape is not necessarily a payment impliedly. He may expressly accept the agreement as it stands, or in a modified from,
voidable for duress. The act was preceeded by an exercise of judgment. This much and live up to it as thus accepted. Or, he may compromise by paying something to be
was plain to him: he had either to let the matter stand as it was with the loss already relieved from its effects or to have its terms changed. Or, he may accept benefits
sustained, or go to the courts to be relieved. His judgment, operating upon this under the contract. In any one of which cases, and there are others not now
condition, told him to pay the additional sum rather than to suffer the inconvenience necessary to mention, he renounces and waives his defense of intimidation and
and expense of an action in court. A payment made under such conditions is not thereby eliminates that element as one having any influence on the case thereafter.
voidable. It is the voluntary act of a sane and mature man performed upon reflection.
Not only this; it is a compromise of the original wrong and a ratification of the relation Taking the case as a whole, we are therefore of the opinion that there was no
which the wrongful act was intended to establish between the parties. intimidation and that, if there was, the plaintiff has placed himself in a position where
he was not entitled to urge it as a defense.
The same may be said with greater force of a case where a person's own voluntary act,
uninfluenced by another, has put him in a disadvantageous position — a position NOTE: You must discuss what disputable presumptions were used in the case.
which another may unjustly make use of to his injury. The failure to reduce a
contract to writing, or to have witnesses present when a verbal agreement is made, or What are the conclusive presumptions under the Rules of Court?
to record an instrument, or to exclude from the operation of its terms things verbally
agreed to be excluded, etc., may place a person in a disadvantageous position with 1. Whenever a party has, by his own declaration, act, or omission, intentionally
respect to another; and the demand that he pay to secure his extrication is not illegal, and deliberately led another to believe a particular thing is true, and to act
and a payment made pursuant to such demand is not necessarily voidable. He pays upon such belief, he cannot, in any litigation arising out of such declaration,
for his lack of foresight. While the demand may be reprehensible morally, it is not act or omission, be permitted to falsify it.
illegal' and of itself is not ground for relief. 2. The tenant is not permitted to deny the title of his landlord at the time of the
commencement of the relation of landlord and tenant between them.
There must, then, be a distinction to be made between a case where a person gives
his consent reluctantly and even against his good sense and judgment, and where he, Is the enumeration of conclusive presumptions exclusive?
in reality, gives no consent at all, as where he executes a contract or performs an act
against his will under a pressure which he cannot resist. It is clear that one acts as No. There are many conclusive presumptions found in substantive and other
voluntarily and independently in the eye of the law when he acts reluctantly and with procedural laws. For example, “ignorance of the law excuses no one from compliance
hesitation as when he acts spontaneously and joyously. Legally speaking he acts as therewith.” Another is the conclusive presumeption of non-filiation in DNA cases.
voluntarily and freely when he acts wholly against his better sense and judgment as
when he acts in conformity with them. Between the two acts there is no difference in Review Tijam vs. Sibonghanoy. What were the conclusive presumptions applied
law. But when his sense, judgment, and his will rebel and he refuses absolutely to act in the case?
as requested, but is nevertheless overcome by force or intimidation to such an extent
that he becomes a mere automation and acts mechanically only, a new element Estoppel in pais after heavily participating in the case knowing that that the court
enters, namely, a disappearance of the personality of the actor. He ceases to exist as had no jurisdiction to try the same.
an independent entity with faculties and judgment, and in his place is substituted
another — the one exercising the force or making use of intimidation. While his hand Give example of estoppel in pais.
signs, the will which moves it is another's. While a contract is made, it has, in reality
and in law, only one party to it; and, there being only one party, the one using the Note: give an example aside from Tijam
force or the intimidation, it is unenforceable for lack of a second party.
 witnesses before the fiscal were produced, they might be found to contain something
different from what was contained in their testimony given in court.
Is there a conclusive presumption under civil procedure?
We know of no rule of practice which sustains the contention of the appellant. The
Yes. Under the Sec. 48 and 49 of Rule 39 (Res Judicata) statements in question were not the sworn declarations of witnesses taken in
conformity with the requirements of section 13 of General Orders, No 58, and which
If a judgment is not yet executory/final, can there be a presumption of are commonly attached to the "expediente" transmitted by the committing magistrate
regularity? to the Court of First Instance. In the case at bar the preliminary examination before
the committing magistrate was waived by the accused, and the declarations of the
YES there is a disputable presumption of correctness of judgment. witnesses for the prosecution were therefore not taken before the magistrate. The
declarations referred to were, on the contrary, taken in an investigation conducted by
How can this be rebutted? the fiscal under the authority of section 1687 of the Administrative Code. This section
authorizes the fiscal, if he deems it wise, to conduct an investigation into the matter of
Upon appeal, ASSIGNMENT OF ERRORS. any crime or misdemeanor for the purpose of instituting or carrying on a criminal
prosecution. It is expressly declared that this section shall not be construed to
PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE authorize a provincial fiscal to act as a justice of the peace in any preliminary
investigation. The proceeding here contemplated is of an administrative character,
US vs. Baluyot and the information thereby acquired is intended for the use of the fiscal in the
conduct of the prosecution. Such declarations therefore pertain to the official file in
At the general election which was held on June 6, 1916, Conrado Lerma was elected the office of the public prosecutor and are not subject to production at the mere
governor of the Province of Bataan. One of his competitors upon this occasion was the request of the attorney for the accused where no ground therefor had been laid
accused, Jose I. Baluyot, who came out third in the race. As a result of this contest a Qrb4Fxm.
feeling of personal rancor was developed in the mind of Baluyot against his successful
competitor, and during the two years which followed the accused became fully imbued In order that we may not be misunderstood, as well as for the purpose of clarifying
with the idea that Governor Lerma was persecuting him. Because of this, Baluyot the practice in such matters, a few words may here by properly said in respect to the
killed Gov. Lerma. proper mode of proceeding in a case where a party wishes to get before the court
contradictory statements made by a witness who is testifying for the adversary party.
During the trial of the case, it appears that after the witnesses had been examined in For instance, if the attorney for the accused had information that a certain witness,
court for the prosecution, they were turned over to the attorney for the accused and say Pedro Gonzales, had made and signed a sworn statement before the fiscal
were by him fully cross-examined. Later, when the giving of testimony for the materially different from that given in his testimony before the court, it was
prosecution had been concluded, the defense proceeded to introduce sundry incumbent upon the attorney when cross-examining said witness to direct his
witnesses who were examined in due course. After four had thus testified, and attention to the discrepancy and to ask him if he did not make such and such
immediately before the accused was placed upon the stand in his own behalf, his statement before the fiscal or if he did not there make a statement different from that
attorney made the request that the declarations or statements made by the witnesses delivered in court. If the witness admits the making of such contradictory statement,
during the preliminary inquiry conducted by the fiscal preparatory to the prosecution the accused has the benefit of the admission, while the witness has the opportunity to
of the case should be produced. The attorney for the prosecution objected on the explain the discrepancy, if he can. On the other hand, if the witness denies making
ground that one party cannot be compelled to produced evidence in favor of the other. any such contradictory statement, the accused has the right to prove that the witness
did make such statement; and if the fiscal should refuse upon due notice to produce
Issue: WON the prosecution may be compelled to produce such declarations and the document, secondary evidence of the contents thereof would be admissible. This
statements made by the witnesses in a preliminary inquiry made by the fiscal. process of cross-examining a witness upon the point of prior contradictory statements
is called in the practice of the American courts "laying a predicate" for the
Held: No. They were not original or independent evidence of such a character as to introduction of contradictory statements. It is almost universally accepted that unless
give the accused an unqualified right to compel their production, and no proper basis a ground is thus laid upon cross-examination, evidence of contradictory statements
was laid in the cross-examination of the witnesses who had made those statements to are not admissible to impeach a witness; though undoubtedly the matter is to a large
justify their production with a view to the impeachment of the declarants. The request extent in the discretion of the court.
was of course based upon the supposition or expectation that if the statements of the
We wish to add that in a case of this kind, if the accused had, by affidavit or A leading question is one that is framed in such a way that the question indicates to
otherwise, made it appear to the satisfaction of the court that the witnesses named the witness the answer desired by the party asking the question. It is a question
had made statements in their declarations before the fiscal materially at variance with which suggests to the witness the answer which the examining party desires.
their statements in court and that the production of said declarations was necessary
or even desirable, in the interests of justice, the court would have had ample power to
order their production. No such showing, or intimation, was made in this case; and
the attorney who made the motion was merely angling at random to discover
something that might prove to be favorable to his client. To put a court in error for What is a misleading question?
refusing to entertain such a motion would encourage frivolous delays and tend to
embarrass the speedy and proper administration of justice. A misleading question is one which assumes as true a fact not yet testified to by the
witness, or contrary to that which he has previously stated.
Under the existing rules, can the accused compel the production of the said
evidence to be used in his favor? Why is a leading question is disallowed in direct? Why is it allowed in cross?

(Pwede: Right under the Constitution - Right of Compulsory process); See Rule 112, Leading questions are disallowed in direct examination because the Rules need to
Sec. 7(b) avoid “coaching” the witness.

How can an accused seek the production of evidence in court? In cross, the witness is expected to be hostile to the cross-examiner. OPINION: Again,
remember the purpose of cross, hence, the cross-examiner is allowed to lead the
Rule 116, Sec. 10: Upon motion of the accused showing good cause and with notice to witness or to suggest to the latter the answer the former desires in order to test whether
the parties, the court, in order to prevent surprise, suppression, or alteration, may the witness is consistent with his statement. However, the direct examiner, not being
order the prosecution to produce and permit the inspection and copying or adverse to the witness, must refrain from leading his witness. The direct examiner must
photographing of any written statement given by the complainant and other witnesses show that the witness knows what he is saying not as suggested by the direct
in any investigation of the offense conducted by the prosecution or other investigating examiner.
officers, as well as any designated documents, documents, papers, books, accounts,
letters, photographs, objects, or tangible things not otherwise privileged, which Example of leading question (Trial Court setting)
constitute or contain evidence material to any matter involved in the case and which
are in the possession or under the control of the prosecution, police, or other law The Scope of Cross-examination?
investigating agencies.
English Rule: where a witness is called to testify to a particular fact, he becomes a
How do you lay the predicate? witness for all purposes and may be fully cross-examined upon all matters material to
the issue, the examination not being confined to the matters inquired about in the
By calling the attention of the witness to the former contradicting statement. If the direct examination.
statement be in writing they must be shown to the witness before any question is put
to him. American Rule: restricts cross-examination to facts and circumstances which are
connected with the matters that have been stated in the direct examination of the
What if the witness states that he does not remember? Or what if he denies witness.
making the said statements?
What rule do we follow here?
Offer the said evidence as an extrajudicial admission (Regalado, citing Juan Ysmael &
Co vs. Hashim, 50 Phil 132). It depends on the witness and the nature of the case being heard. If the witness is an
accused in the criminal case, he/she may only be cross examined on matters
What is a leading question? discussed in the direct examination.

Can an accused who testifies on his on behalf, be examined using strictly the
American Rule?
 2. As regards the testimony of a witness, the offer must be made at the time the
YES, otherwise his right against self-incrimination may be violated. witness is called to testify.
3. Documentary and object evidence shall be offered after the presentation of a
If the opponent decides not to conduct a cross-examination on the witness, will party’s testimonial evidence. Such offer shall be done orally unless allowed by
that be prejudicial to the client’s cause? Can a cross-examination cause the court to be done in writing.
prejudice to a client?
Procedural steps?
The BOSTON LEGAL Rule: Kapag walang na-establish sa direct, do not cross
examine. Baka kapag nagcross-examination ka e madale ka at maestablish ang claim For testimonial evidence, just follow the codal procedure.
ng kalaban mo.
For documentary or object evidence:
What is the Rule on Revival of past recollection/present memory?
1. Call upon the witness;
1. A witness may be allowed to refresh his memory respecting a fact, by anything 2. Qualify the witness;
written or recorded by himself or under his direction at the time when the fact 3. Ask the witness preliminary questions;
occurred, or immediately thereafter, or at any other time when the fact was 4. Present evidence to witness and ask him to authenticate/identify the evidence
fresh in his memory and he knew that the same was correctly written or if necessary;
recorded; but in such case the writing the writing or record must be produced 5. Mark the evidence as an exhibit.
and may be inspected by the adverse party who may, if he chooses, cross- 6. After all the witnesses have testified, offer the exhibits in court, identifying
examine the witness upon it, and may read it in evidence. each of them, and stating their purpose.
2. A witness may testify from such a writing or record, though he retain no
recollection of the particular facts,if he is able to swear that the writing or Challenging the qualification of a witness?
record correctly stated the transaction when made; but such evidence must be
received with caution. Through “voi dire” examination.

Are we to assume every time that a memorandum is available for reference? Should you allow the witness to testify first before you disqualify him?

Opinion: No. The same must be presented in court. No there are instances where a witness before he can be allowed to testify, may be
disallowed to testify.
The memorandum from which the witness may be permitted to refresh his memory
need NOT be an original writing. It is sufficient if it is shown that the witness knows Absolute disqualifications?
the copy to be a true one, and his memory refreshed thereby enables him to testify
from his own recollection of the facts, independent of his confidence in the accuracy of Those witnesses not identified in the pre-trial brief. Are they disqualified?
the copy.
Generally, YES.

If the witness is excluded prior to testifying, what is the remedy?

OFFER OF EVIDENCE The Court may be liberal. Kausapin mo lang daw sabi ni Jara (in reference to Phoenix
vs. Pratts).
How do you offer an evidence?
If the witness is allowed to testify, questions will be asked. In the course of
1. The court shall consider no evidence which has not been formally offered. The propounding questions, there are certain objectionable questions. How do you
purpose for which the evidence is offered must be specified. classify objections? (General/Specific). Distinguish.
 proper time, and that if not so made it will be understood to have been waived. The
General Objection – It does not go beyond declaring the evidence as immaterial, proper time to make a protest or objection is when, from the question addressed to
incompetent, irrelevant or inadmissible. In other words, it does not specify the the witness, or from the answer thereto, or from the presentation of the proof, the
grounds for objection. (Also known as a Broadside Objection) inadmissiblity of the evidence is, or may be, inferred.

Specific Objection – It states why or how the evidence is irrelevant or incompetent. A motion to strike out parol or documentary evidence from the record is useless and
E.g. Objection to the question for being leading. ineffective if made without timely protest, objection, or opposition on the part of the
party against whom it was presented.
Formal Objection – is one directed against the alleged defect in the formulation of the
question. E.g. ambiguous question Objection to the introduction of evidence should be made before the question is
answered. When no such objection is made, a motion to strike out the answer
Substantive Objection – objections made and directed against the very nature of the ordinarily comes too late. (De Dios Chua Soco vs. Veloso, 2 Phil. Rep., 658).
evidence, i.e., it is inadmissible either because it is irrelevant or incompetent or both.
e.g. parol, hearsay evidence The fact that the defendants' counsel asked various cross-questions, both of the
plaintiff and of the other witness, in connection with the answers given by them in
What if there is a failure to object, can the court prohibit the witness from their direct examination, with respect to particulars concerning the contract, implies a
answering the question? waiver on his part to have the evidence stricken out.

Yes. If it involves an infringement of the right of the witness. It is true that, before cross-examining the plaintiff and one of the witnesses, this same
counsel requested the permission of the court, and stipulated that his clients' rights
Abrenica vs. Gonda should not be prejudiced by the answers to those witnesses in view of the motion
presented to strike out their testimony; buy this stipulation of the defendants' counsel
These proceedings were brought by the plaintiff to compel the defendant to return to has no value or importance whatever, because, if the answers of those witnesses were
him the two parcels of land described in the complaint which he alleges were sold by stricken out, the cross-examination could have no object whatsoever, and if the
him under right of repurchase to the defendant on February 21, 1916, for the sum of questions were put to the witnesses and answered by them, they could only be taken
P75 and for the period of seven years. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant refused into account by connecting them with the answers given by those witnesses on direct
to deliver said property to him when, upon the expiration of the period mentioned, he examination
endeavored to redeem the same and tendered payment to the defendant of the sum
aforesaid. As no timely objection or protest was made to the admission of the testimony of the
plaintiff with respect to the contract; and as the motion to strike out said evidence
During the trial, the plaintiff, having been placed on the stand as a witness by his on came to late; and, furthermore, as the defendants themselves, by the cross-questions
attorney, testified at length and answered all the questions asked him with respect to put by their counsel for the witnesses in respect to said contract, tacitly waived their
the said contract, the details of the same, the persons who witnessed it, the place right to have it stricken out, that evidence, therefore, cannot be considered either
where it was made, and various other circumstances connected with its execution. inadmissible or illegal, and court, far from having erred in taking it into consideration
These questions and answers cover six pages of the record, and yet the defendants' and basing his judgment thereon, notwithstanding the fact that it was ordered to be
counsel raised no objection to the examination, aside from challenging one of the stricken out during the trial, merely corrected the error he committed in ordering it to
questions as leading and another of them as irrelevant. It seems that only when the be so stricken out and complied with the rules of procedure hereinbefore cited.
examination was terminated did counsel for defendants move to strike out all of the
testimony given and statements made by plaintiff in regard to the contract, on the In Re Aguas?
ground that the period for the fulfillment of the contract exceeded one year and that it
could not be proven except by means of a written instrument. It appears from the record in this matter that on the 29th of August, 1900, during the
Issue: WON the statements may be stricken out despite not being objected to during progress of a trial then being held before the Court of First Instance at Bacolor, in the
the examination of the witness. Province of Pampanga, the court had occasion to caution Angel Alberto, a witness in
the case, not to look at the attorney for the defendant but to fix his attention on the
Held: No. Now then, it has been repeatedly laid down as a rule of evidence that a judge who was at the time examining him. It seems that the witness did not give heed
protest or objection against the admission of any evidence must be made at the to this warning, and the judge thereupon arose from his seat and approaching the
witness, seized him by the shoulders, and using the expression, "Lingon ang mucha" with the idea that Governor Lerma was persecuting him. Because of this, Baluyot
("Look at me"), either shook him, as insisted by the attorney for the defendant, or only killed Gov. Lerma.
turned him about, as claimed by the judge and others. Whether the witness was
shaken or only turned about, at all events "seizing him," brought the defendant's During the trial of the case, it appears that after the witnesses had been examined in
attorney to his feet, who, protesting against the action of the judge as coercive of the court for the prosecution, they were turned over to the attorney for the accused and
witness, demanded that a record be made of the occurrence and that the further were by him fully cross-examined. Later, when the giving of testimony for the
hearing of the case be postponed. Two days afterward the clerk entered in his record prosecution had been concluded, the defense proceeded to introduce sundry
as recital of the incident substantially as above, and also a statement that on other witnesses who were examined in due course. After four had thus testified, and
and prior occasions the attorney, Marcelino Aguas, had been wanting in respect to the immediately before the accused was placed upon the stand in his own behalf, his
court by making use of "improper phrases," and by interrupting opposing counsel in attorney made the request that the declarations or statements made by the witnesses
their examination of witnesses. The court on this record adjudged the attorney to be during the preliminary inquiry conducted by the fiscal preparatory to the prosecution
in contempt of court and suspended him from the practice of his profession for a of the case should be produced. The attorney for the prosecution objected on the
period of twenty days. ground that one party cannot be compelled to produced evidence in favor of the other.

Issue: WON the counsel may be cited in contempt of court. Issue: WON the prosecution may be compelled to produce such declarations and
statements made by the witnesses in a preliminary inquiry made by the fiscal.
Held: No. In our opinion the action of the judge in seizing the witness, Alberto Angel,
by the shoulder and turning him about was unwarranted and an interference with Held: No. They were not original or independent evidence of such a character as to
that freedom from unlawful personal violence to which every witness is entitled while give the accused an unqualified right to compel their production, and no proper basis
giving testimony in a court of justice. Against such conduct the appellant had the was laid in the cross-examination of the witnesses who had made those statements to
right to protest and to demand were respectfully made and with due regard for the justify their production with a view to the impeachment of the declarants. The request
dignity of the court. The only question, therefore in this case is, Was the appellant was of course based upon the supposition or expectation that if the statements of the
respectful and regardful of the court's dignity in presenting his objection and asking witnesses before the fiscal were produced, they might be found to contain something
that it be recorded in the proceedings? The witnesses say and the judge finds that "his different from what was contained in their testimony given in court.
attitude was menacing" (bastante amenazadora) in the moment of making his protest,
but beyond that there is nothing in the record which even tends to show that he was We know of no rule of practice which sustains the contention of the appellant. The
disrespectful to the court or unmindful of its dignity. In our opinion both testimony statements in question were not the sworn declarations of witnesses taken in
and finding state a mere conclusion which, in the absence of the facts from which it conformity with the requirements of section 13 of General Orders, No 58, and which
was deduced, is wholly valueless to support a judgment of contempt. The statement are commonly attached to the "expediente" transmitted by the committing magistrate
that the attorney's attitude was "menacing" tended no more to competently establish to the Court of First Instance. In the case at bar the preliminary examination before
the alleged offense of contempt than if the witnesses had testified and the court had the committing magistrate was waived by the accused, and the declarations of the
found that his conduct was "contemptuous or lacking in respect." The specific act witnesses for the prosecution were therefore not taken before the magistrate. The
from which it was inferred that his attitude was menacing should have been testified declarations referred to were, on the contrary, taken in an investigation conducted by
to by the witnesses and found by the court, and failing that, the record does not show the fiscal under the authority of section 1687 of the Administrative Code. This section
concrete facts sufficient to justify the conclusion that he was disrespectful to the authorizes the fiscal, if he deems it wise, to conduct an investigation into the matter of
court or offensive to its dignity. any crime or misdemeanor for the purpose of instituting or carrying on a criminal
prosecution. It is expressly declared that this section shall not be construed to
authorize a provincial fiscal to act as a justice of the peace in any preliminary
investigation. The proceeding here contemplated is of an administrative character,
US vs. Baluyot? and the information thereby acquired is intended for the use of the fiscal in the
conduct of the prosecution. Such declarations therefore pertain to the official file in
At the general election which was held on June 6, 1916, Conrado Lerma was elected the office of the public prosecutor and are not subject to production at the mere
governor of the Province of Bataan. One of his competitors upon this occasion was the request of the attorney for the accused where no ground therefor had been laid
accused, Jose I. Baluyot, who came out third in the race. As a result of this contest a Qrb4Fxm.
feeling of personal rancor was developed in the mind of Baluyot against his successful
competitor, and during the two years which followed the accused became fully imbued
In order that we may not be misunderstood, as well as for the purpose of clarifying sworn statement substantially contradicts the testimony in court (Edwin Tabao v.
the practice in such matters, a few words may here by properly said in respect to the People, G.R. No. 187246).
proper mode of proceeding in a case where a party wishes to get before the court Impeachment of a witness via contradictory evidence. How is this done?
contradictory statements made by a witness who is testifying for the adversary party.
For instance, if the attorney for the accused had information that a certain witness, See Illustration made by Riano on page 325.
say Pedro Gonzales, had made and signed a sworn statement before the fiscal
materially different from that given in his testimony before the court, it was In case of dying declarations, can you impeach the declaration of a deceased?
incumbent upon the attorney when cross-examining said witness to direct his
attention to the discrepancy and to ask him if he did not make such and such You can now use the adverse character of the deceased declarant in impeaching the
statement before the fiscal or if he did not there make a statement different from that said testimony.
delivered in court. If the witness admits the making of such contradictory statement,
the accused has the benefit of the admission, while the witness has the opportunity to Is the impeachment limited on the person on the stand?
explain the discrepancy, if he can. On the other hand, if the witness denies making
any such contradictory statement, the accused has the right to prove that the witness No.
did make such statement; and if the fiscal should refuse upon due notice to produce
the document, secondary evidence of the contents thereof would be admissible. This Rule on Evidence on Motions
process of cross-examining a witness upon the point of prior contradictory statements
is called in the practice of the American courts "laying a predicate" for the When a motion is based on facts not appearing of record, the court may hear the
introduction of contradictory statements. It is almost universally accepted that unless matter on affidavits or depositions presented by the respective parties, but the court
a ground is thus laid upon cross-examination, evidence of contradictory statements may direct that the matter be heard wholly or partly on oral testimony or depositions.
are not admissible to impeach a witness; though undoubtedly the matter is to a large
extent in the discretion of the court. Is there a need to present evidence when one files a motion? How?

We wish to add that in a case of this kind, if the accused had, by affidavit or Yes. Attach the evidence on the motions.
otherwise, made it appear to the satisfaction of the court that the witnesses named
had made statements in their declarations before the fiscal materially at variance with Is there a motion that requires a full blown hearing and presentation of
their statements in court and that the production of said declarations was necessary evidence? –
or even desirable, in the interests of justice, the court would have had ample power to
order their production. No such showing, or intimation, was made in this case; and BAIL (Evidence of Guilt is strong – quantum of proof)
the attorney who made the motion was merely angling at random to discover
something that might prove to be favorable to his client. To put a court in error for How about in a civil case?
refusing to entertain such a motion would encourage frivolous delays and tend to
embarrass the speedy and proper administration of justice. In cases of injunction

What is the effect when there are inconsistencies between a witness’ affidavit QUANTUM OF PROOF
and his testimony in open court?
Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt
Discrepancies and/or inconsistencies between a witness’ affidavit and testimony in
open court do not impair credibility as affidavits are taken ex parte and are open It does not mean such degree of proof as, excluding possibility of error, produces
incomplete or inaccurate for lack or absence of searching inquiries by the absolute certainty. Moral certainty only is required, or that degree of proof which
investigating officer. The general rule – that contradictions and discrepancies between produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind.
the testimony of a witness and his statements in an affidavit do not necessarily
discredit him – is not without exception, as when the omission in the affidavit refers Clear and Convincing
to a very important detail of the incident that one relating to the incident as an
eyewitness would not be expected to fail to mention, or when the narration in the That degree of proof which will produce in the mind of the trier of facts a firm belief or
conviction as to the allegations sought to be established.
Is there a definition given in the Rules?

No. such quantum of proof is defined by jurisprudence.

When do we use this?

In extradition proceedings and other cases as may be defined by jurisprudence.

Preponderance of Evidence?

That which is of greater weight or more convincing than that which is offered in
opposition to it.

Substantial evidence

That amount of relevant evidence which a reasonable mind might accept as adequate
to justify a conclusion.

You always expect the mind of the judge to be reasonable right?

Yes. Presumption of regularity of official functions.

What is the concept of Demeanor Evidence?

Whenever a witness testifies in court, the judge may be allowed to determine his
credibility by observing his demeanor while he is testifying in court.

What is the importance of demeanor evidence as far as the appellate court is

concerned?

NONE. Appellate courts are not in a position to observe the demeanor of a witness.
Nevertheless, it does not preclude them from entertaining questions of fact (opinion
lang po).

Quasi Judicial bodies are given authority to make rules of procedure right? Are
they allowed to make rules as to the quantum of evidence that may be used in
their proceedings?

No. Quantum of proof is always determined by the Courts. Sec. 5 Art.VIII of the
Constitution is controlling.
Are there Court cases that only require substantial evidence?

Yes. AMPARO. HABEAS DATA. KALIKASAN. (Jara: do not make the mistake in stating
that substantial evidence is only available in administrative and quasi-judicial cases.