Evidence 2003

 REMEDIAL LAW REVIEWER 
1 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY BAR OPERATIONS
contents of a document other than the

EVIDENCE original, unless the contents are the
subjects of inquiry.
Rule 130 2. Secondary Evidence

RULES OF ADMISSIBILITY
Q: How may the original of a lost or
destroyed document be proved?
A: When the original document has been
1. Best Evidence Rule lost or destroyed, or cannot be
produced in court, the offeror, upon
Q: State the best evidence rule. proof of its execution or existence and
A: When the subject of inquiry is the the cause of its unavailability without
contents of a document, no evidence bad faith on his part, may prove its
shall be admissible other than the contents in some authentic document,
original document itself. (Sec. 3) or by testimony of witnesses in the
order stated. (Sec. 5; People vs.
Q: The rule is that, no evidence Dismuke, 53 SCAD 182, G.R. No.
shall be admissible other than the document 108453, July 11, 1994).
itself. Are there exceptions?
A: Yes, and they are: Q: When may secondary evidence
(a) When the original has been lost or be shown if the original of a document is in
destroyed, or cannot be produced the possession of the adverse party.
in court, without bad faith on the A: If the document is in the custody or
part of the offeror; under the control of the adverse party,
(b) When the original is in the custody he must have reasonable notice to
or under the control of the party produce it. If after such notice and
against whom the evidence is after satisfactory proof of its existence,
offered, and the latter fails to he fails to produce the document,
produce it after reasonable notice; secondary evidence may be presented
(c) When the original consists of as in the case of its loss. (Sec. 6).
numerous accounts or other
documents which cannot be Q: How may a public document be
examined in court without great proved?
loss of time and the fact sought to A: When the original of a document is in
be established from them is only the custody of a public officer or is
the general result of the whole; and recorded in a public office, its contents
(d) When the original is a public record may be proved by a certified copy
in the custody of a public officer or issued by the public officer in custody
is recorded in a public office. (Sec. thereof. (Sec. 7).
3).
Q: During the trial, X moved for
Q: What are considered originals of a the production of a document. Is it obligatory
document? for him to offer it in evidence?
A: They are: A: No. A party who calls for the
(a) When the original of a document is production of a document and inspects
one the contents of which are the the same is not obliged to offer it as
subject of inquiry; evidence. (Sec. 8)
(b) When a document is in two or more
copies executed at or about the
same time, with identical contents, 3. Parol Evidence Rule
all such copies are equally
regarded as originals; Q: State the rule when the terms of
(c) When an entry is repeated in the the agreement are put to writing.
regular course of business, one A: When the terms of an agreement have
being copied from another at or been reduced to writing, it is
near the time of the transaction, all considered as containing all the terms
the entries are likewise equally agreed upon and there can be,
regarded as originals. (Sec. 4). between the parties and their
successors-in-interest, no evidence of
Q: State the extent of applicability of such terms other than the contents of
the best evidence rule. the written agreement. (Sec. 9).
A: It is only applied to prove the contents
of a document, but not the truth Q: Under what circumstances
thereof. It prohibits the evidence of the may a party present evidence to modify,
 Prepared by the REMEDIAL LAW SECTION  Chief CHRISTIAN PAUL ULPINDO Assistant Chief MAGDALENA ERFE Members
YVONNE BINWAG, SHARON BANAGEN, CHARLES JAVIER CALAPINI, BRIAN CRISPIN, QUOINA GABOL, RAYMOND MENDOZA,
RUSSEL SABADO, MICHELLE EXIOMO and ANA MAY CORPUZ. All Rights Reserved by the SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF
LAW BAR OPERATIONS  2003.
explain or add to the terms of the were bank officers; one being a lawyer
written agreement? (Pangilinan), and supposed to be
A: A party may present evidence to equipped in legal and banking
modify, explain or add to the terms of knowledge and practices. As such,
the written agreement if he puts in they were expected to know the
issue in his pleading: consequences of their act of signing a
(a) An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or document which outrightly transferred
imperfection in the written ownership over the subject vehicle in
agreement; favor of respondent Santos. They could
(b) The failure of the written have incorporated in the deed of sale
agreement to express the true (if such was the intention or
intent and agreement of the parties agreement of the parties) a stipulation
thereto; that transfer of ownership and
(c) The validity of the written registration of the vehicle in Santos’
agreement; or name were conditioned on the failure
(d) The existence of other terms of his relatives to recover their time
agreed to by the parties or their deposit placements in petitioner bank.
successors-in-interest after the No such stipulation was incorporated in
execution of the written the deed of sale which was an outright
agreement. and unconditional transfer of
The term “agreement” includes wills. ownership of the motor vehicle to
(Sec. 9). respondent Santos. (Pioneer Savings
and Loan Bank vs. CA, et al.,45 SCAD
Q: A contract of sale of a motor 25, G.R. No. 105419, Sept. 27,1993).
vehicle was entered into between
A and B. Later on, a controversy Q: May parol evidence be presented
arose where the seller contended to show that one party was
that there was actually no defrauded into signing it?
consideration in the sale and that A: Yes. Parol evidence is admissible to
the deed was merely a security for show that a contract was fraudulently
the time deposit placements of misread to one not able to read and
the buyer’s relatives with the write and that he was by such fraud
bank. May the deed of sale be indeed to give his signature that were
proved or altered by parol it not for the misrepresentation, he
evidence? Why? would not have signed the document.
A: No. It is a well-accepted principle of (De la Cruz vs. Capinpin).
law that evidence of a prior or
contemporaneous verbal agreement is Q: State the reason why parol
generally not admissible to vary, evidence is inadmissible to vary
contradict or defeat the opration of a the terms of a contract?
valid instrument. (American Factors A: This is so because spoken words could
[Phils.] Inc. vs. CA, Tire Corporation, et be notoriously unreliable, unlike a
al., [CA] 49 O.G. 189; Ortanez vs. CA, written contract which speaks of a
78 SCAD 261, et al., G.R. No. 107372, uniform language. (De Leon vs. CA,
Jan. 23, 1997). 204 SCRA 612; Abella vs. CA, 71 SCAD
While parol evidence is admissible in a 210, G.R. No.107606, June 20, 1996).
variety of ways to explain the meaning
of written contracts, it cannot serve Q: May parol evidence be presented
the purpose of incorporating into the to show prior or contemporaneous
contracts additional contemporaneous acts or agreements to vary
conditions which are not mentioned at transaction?
all in the writing, unless there has A: As a rule, no. It is a well-accepted rule
been fraud or mistake. (Yu Tek & Co. that evidence is inadmissible to vary,
vs Gonzales, 29 Phil. 384; see also De contradict, or defeat the operation of a
La Rama vs. Ledesma, 143 SCRA valid transaction. While parol evidence
[1986]. is admissible in a variety of ways to
In one case, the petitioner failed to explain the meaning of written
produce any instrument or written contracts, it cannot serve the purpose
document which would prove that the of incorporating into the contract
deed of sale in question was only a additional contemporaneous conditions
security for the time deposit which are not mentioned at all in the
placements of respondent’s relatives in writing unless there has been fraud or
the petitioner bank. The two (2) main mistake, (Dela Rama vs. Ledesma).
witnesses for the petitioner, namely,
Messrs. Eudela and Pangilinan, were
not mere employees of the bank. They
Q: X sold his house and lot with right

to repurchase to Y. Can he prove it
to be one of sale with mortgage?
A: Yes. Even when a document appears
on its face to be sale with pacto de
retro, the owner of the property may
prove that the contract is really a loan
with mortgage by raising as an issue
the fact that the document does not RULE 131
express the true intent and agreement
of parties. In this case, parol evidence
BURDEN OF PROOF AND
then becomes competent and PRESUMPTIONS
admissible to prove that the
instrument was in truth and in fact
given merely as a security for the ` BURDEN OF PROOF ‘ ( onus probandi )
payment of the loan. And upon proof of DEFINED:
the truth of such allegations, the court
will enforce the agreement of the Burden of proof is the duty of a party
aprties at the time of the execution of to present evidence on the facts in issue
the contract. This principle is necessary to establish his claim or defense by
applicable even if the purported sale the amount of evidence required by law
on pacto de retro was registered in the ( sec. 1 Rule 131 )
name of the transferee and a new
certificate of title was issued in the ` BURDEN OF EVIDENCE ‘ DEFINED:
name of the latter. (Olea vs. CA, et al.,
61 SCAD 100, G.R. No. 117389, May Burden of evidence is the duty of a
11, 1995). party, at any particular time during the trial,
to create a prima facie case in his favor, or to
Q: What is the extent of the overthrow one when created against him.
applicability of the parol evidence
rule? BURDEN OF PROOF & BURDEN OF
A: The parol evidence rule applies to an EVIDENCE, DISTINGUISHED:
agreement in writing, regardless of BURDEN OF PROOF BURDEN OF
whether the written contract is a public EVIDENCE
or private document. (Inciong, Jr. vs. -never shifts -shifts to 1 party
CA, et al., 71 SCAD 287, G.R. -determined by the when the other
No.96405, June 26, 1996). pleadings party has
-a legal created a prima
presumption facie case
creates the -determined by
necessity of the progress of
presenting the trial
evidence to meet -a legal
the prima facie presumption
case creates a prima
facie case &
shifts burden of
evidence to the
other party
` PRIMA FACIE CASE ‘ DEFINED:
A prima facie case is one which is

supported by sufficient evidence and will
support a finding in the absence of evidence
to controvert it.
WHO HAS THE BURDEN OF PROOF?
In civil cases, the burden of proof rests

upon the party who will fail if he offers no
evidence competent to show the fact averred
as the basis for the relief he seeks to obtain.
In criminal cases, the burden of proof
is on the prosecution to prove, beyond a
reasonable doubt, the essential elements of accused. She could have verily disproved
the offense with which the accused is these damning circumstances by mere
charged. presentation of a copy of her license.
WHAT MATTERS NEED BE PROVED? People vs Mesal

244 S 166
As a general rule, all facts in issue and
relevant facts must be proved by evidence. The presentation of either the
testimony of a representative of , or a
WHAT MATTERS NEED NOT BE PROVED? certification from the PNP Firearms &
Explosives Unit, may be dispensed with to
The following classes of facts need not prove illegal possession of firearm where
be proved: other evidence firmly and undisputably
i. those within the judicial established that the accused did not have,
notice of courts and could not possibly have, the requisite
ii. those admitted license or authority to possess a rifle which
iii. those legally presumed only military men are authorized to possess.
MUST A NEGATIVE ALLEGATION BE People vs Mendi

PROVED? 19 Feb. 2001
Generally, a negative allegation need Appellant must be acquitted for failure

not be proved. However, it must be proved of the prosecution to prove the 2nd element of
when, in a civil action, it is an essential part of the offense which is non-possession of a
the cause of action or, in a criminal action, it license.
is an essential element of the crime alleged. People vs Mesal is inapplicable as the
firearm involved in this case, a .38 cal. Smith
& Wesson ‘ paltik’ revolver, is not one
People vs Tiozon exclusively issued to the military.
198 S 368
There being no proof that accused- PRESUMPTION DEFINED:

appellant had no license to possess the
firearm in question, he could not be convicted A presumption is an inference of the
for illegal possession of firearm. existence or non-existence of some fact which
Although proof of the existence or non common sense draws from the connection,
existence of such license can, with more relations and coincidence of facts and
facility, be adduced by the defendant, it is circumstances with each other.
nevertheless, incumbent upon the party
alleging the want of the license to prove the
allegation. Naturally, as the subject matter of CLASSES OF PRESUMPTIONS:
the averment is one which lies peculiarly
within the control or knowledge of the A. Presumption ` juris ‘ or of law – a
accused, prima facie evidence thereof on the deduction which the law considers as
part of the prosecution shall suffice to cast established from facts proven.
the onus upon him. B. Presumption “ hominis “ or of fact – a
deduction or inference which reason or
People vs Manalo experience draws
230 S 309 from other facts proved.
ISSUE: Accused-appellant maintains CLASSES OF PRESUMPTION JURIS:

that since the absence of a license or
authority is an essential ingredient of the A. Conclusive Presumption or Presumption et
crime ( violation of the anti-drug law ), proof de Jure – that whish is not permitted to be
of such negative allegation should have been overcome by any proof to the contrary,
presented by the prosecution. however strong.
HELD: The negative averment that the B. Disputable Presumption or Presumption
accused had no license or authority to sell Juris Tantum – that which suffices until
‘shabu’ has been fairly indicated by the overcome by contrary evidence.
following circumstances, deduced from and
established by the testimony of the arresting WHAT ARE THE INSTANCES OF
officers, viz: the accused was caught selling ‘ CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTIONS?
shabu’ not in a hospital or pharmacy at an
unholy hour xxxxxxxx. She delivered the drug The following are instances of
to the poseur-buyer. Proof of these conclusive presumptions:
circumstances thus shifted the onus on the
1. Equitable estoppel or estoppel in Discussions on some of the disputable

pais and presumptions:
2. Estoppel by deed ie. against
tenant a.) that a person is innocent of crime or
wrong;
WHAT IS THE RULE ON EQUITABLE The accused is presumed innocent
ESTOPPEL OR ESTOPPEL IN PAIS? until the contrary is proved by the
prosecution. If the prosecution fails, it
The Rule is that whenever a party has, fails utterly, even if the defense is
by his own declaration, act or omission, weak or even if there is no defense at
intentionally and deliberately led another to all. ( People v Castro 4 Oct. 1989 )
believe a particular thing true, and to act
upon such belief, he cannot in any litigation If the evidence gives rise to 2
arising out of such declaration, act or possibilities, one consistent with the
omission, be permitted to falsify it. ( sec. 2(a) defendant’s innocence and another
Rule 131 ) indicative of his guilt, that which favors
the accused should be considered.
WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THE RULE? ( People v Go 142 S 238 )
The Rule is based on grounds of public b.) that an unlawful act was done with an
policy and good faith, it being intended to unlawful intent;
afford protection against injustice and fraud A crime is not committed if the mind of
by denying to a person the right to repudiate the person performing the act
his acts, admissions or representations which complained of be innocent.
have been relied on by the person to whom
they were directed and whose conduct they c.) that a person takes ordinary care of his
were intended to, and did, influence. concerns;
In the absence of proof tending to
WHAT ARE THE ELEMENTS OF ESTOPPEL show the contrary, where a person is
IN PAIS? killed by an accident to which there
are no eyewitnesses, the presumption
1. there must have been a of the law is that he was in the
representation or concealment of exercise of due care.
material facts;
2. the representation must have been d.) that evidence willfully suppressed would
made with knowledge of the facts; be adverse if produced;This presumption is
3. the party to whom the INAPPLICABLE where:
representation was made must i. the evidence is at the
have been ignorant of the truth of disposal of both parties
the matter; and ii. the suppression was not
4. the representation must have been willful
with intention that the other party iii. the evidence suppressed
would act upon it. was merely
corroborative or
cumulative
iv. the suppression is an
WHAT IS THE RULE ON ESTOPPEL exercise of a privilege
AGAINST TENANT?
The Rule is that 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. ( sec.
2(b) Rule 131 )
Sec. 3 Rule 131 ( a – kk ) enumerates the

disputable presumptions; those that are
satisfactory if uncontradicted, but may be
contradicted and overcome by other
evidence.
RULE 132
PRESENTATION OF 1) To be protected
EVIDENCE from irrelevant, improper, or
insulting questions, and from
EXAMINATION OF harsh or insulting demeanor;
WITNESSES 2) Not to be detained
longer than the interests of
justice require;
Section 1. Examination to be done in 3) Not to be examined
open court. except only as to matters
pertinent to the issue;
How may the examination of a witness be 4) Not to give an
done/ How oral evidence is given? answer which will tend to
subject him to a penalty for an
Answer: The examination of witnesses offense unless otherwise
presented in a trial or hearing shall be done in provided by law;
open court and under oath or affirmation. 5) Not to give an
Unless the witness is incapacitated to speak, answer which will tend to
or the question calls for a different mode of degrade his reputation, unless
answer, the answers of the witness shall be it be to the very fact at issue or
given orally. to a fact from which the fact in
: It is usually given orally, in open court. issue would be presumed. But
Therefore, generally the testimonies of a witness must answer to the
witness cannot be presented in affidavit. fact of his previous final
-One instance when the testimonies of conviction for an offense.
witnesses may be given in affidavits is under
the rule on summary procedure. NOTE: The exception refers to immunity
statutes wherein the witness is granted
PURPOSE: to enable the court to judge the immunity from criminal prosecution for
credibility of the witness by the witness’ offenses admitted in his testimony, e.g. under
manner of testifying their intelligence and Sec. 8, R.A. 1379, the law providing for the
their appearance. forfeiture of unlawfully acquired property; and
under P.D. 749 in prosecutions for bribery and
The form and nature of the questions that graft.
may and may not be propounded to a witness
are as follows:  Classification of Immunity
Statutes
Questions must not be indefinite or uncertain; Use immunity – prohibits use of
Questions must be relevant; witness compelled testimony and its
Questions must not be argumentative; fruit in any manner in connection with
Questions must not call for conclusion of law; the criminal prosecution despite
Questions must not call for opinion or hearsay invocation of rights against self-
evidence; incrimination.
Questions must not call for illegal answer;
Questions must not call for self-incriminating Transactional Immunity – grants
testimony; immunity to the witness from
Questions must not be leading prosecution for an offense to which his
Questions must not tend to degrade compelled testimony relates.
reputation of witness;
Questions must not be repetitious NOTE: For purposes of evidence, Right
against self incrimination refers to testimonial
NOTE: The testimony of a witness in court compulsion.
cannot be considered self-serving since ha  Right against self-incrimination is
can be subjected to cross-examination. Self- granted only in favor of individuals;
serving evidence is one made out of court and hence, a corporation cannot invoke
is excluded on the same ground as hearsay that privilege as the question
evidence. An instance would be; The testimony can come only from a
deprivation of a witness to the right of cross- corporate officer or employee who has
examination. a personality distinct from that of the
corporation.
Section 3: Rights and Obligations of a  Right against self-incrimination
witness extends to administrative proceedings
with a criminal or penal aspect.
What are the rights of a witness?  Not to give an answer which will tend
to degrade his reputation, unless it be
Answer: The rights of a Witness are: to the very fact at issue or to a fact
from which the fact at issue would be Answer: Yes, a witness must answer
presumed. But a witness must answer questions, although his answer may tend to
to the fact of his previous final establish a claim against him. (Sec. 3)
conviction for an offense.
Section 4. Order in the examination of an
WITNESS PROTECTION SECURITY AND individual witness
BENEFIT ACT RA 6981:
State the order of examination of an
SEC.10 State Witness - person who has individual witness.
participated in the commission of a crime and
desires to be a witness for the state shall be Answer: The order of examination of an
admitted into the program whenever the individual witness may be examined is as
following circumstances are present: follows:
1) the offense in which his testimony will
be used is a grave felony as defined a) Direct examination by
under RPC or its equivalent under the proponent;
special laws; b) Cross-examination by
2) absolute necessity for his testimony; the opponent;
3) there is no direct evidence available c) Re-direct examination
for the proper prosecution of the by the proponent;
offense committed; d) Re-cross examination by
4) his testimony can be substantially the opponent. (Sec.4)
corroborated on its involving moral
turpitude; PURPOSES OF CROSS-EXAMINATION
5) he does not appear to be the most 1. To discredit the witness;
guilty; and 2. To discredit the testimony of the
6) he has not at any time been convicted witness;
of any crime involving moral turpitude. 3. To clarify certain matters;
4. To elicit admissions from a witness.
SEC.11 Sworn Statement - before any
person is admitted into the program he shall SCOPE OR LIMITS OF CROSS-
execute a sworn statement describing in EXAMINATION:
detail the manner the offense was committed 1. ENGLISH RULE-where a witness is
and his participation therein. called to testify to a particular fact, he
If his application is denied, said sworn becomes a witness for all purposes and
statement and other testimony given in may be fully cross-examined upon all
support of said application shall not be matters material to the issue, the
admissible in evidence, except for examination not being confined to the
impeachment purposes. matters inquired about in the direct
examination.
SEC. 12 Effect of admission of a state 2. AMERICAN RULE-restricts cross-
witness into the program – The examination to facts and
certification of admission into the program by circumstances which are connected
the department shall be given full faith and with the matters that have been stated
credit by the provincial or city prosecutor who in the direct examination of the
is required not to include the witness in a witness.
criminal complaint or information and if
included therein to petition the court for his Under Philippine Jurisdiction, we follow the
discharge in order that he can be utilized as a two rules, specifically under the following
state witness.. instances:
Admission into the program shall  In civil cases, we follow the
entitle such state witness to immunity from English Rule, which allows the
criminal prosecution for the offense in which cross-examination to elicit all
his testimony will be given and used. important facts bearing upon
the issue (Sec. 6), but this does
SEC. 13 Failure or Refusal of the Witness not mean that a party by doing
to Testify – Failure without just cause when so is making the witness his
lawfully obliged to do so, shall be prosecuted own in accordance with Section
fro contempt. If he testifies falsely or 5.
evasively, he shall be liable for perjury. His  In two instances we follow the
immunity shall be removed and he shall be American Rule, 1) the accused
subject to contempt or criminal prosecution. may only be cross-examined on
matters covered by direct
Must a witness answer any question asked? examination 2) hostile witness.
When cross-examination cannot be

done or completed due to causes attributable  Under the rule on examination
to the party who offered the witness, the of a child witness, corroboration
incomplete testimony is rendered shall not be required of a
incompetent and should be stricken from the testimony of a child. His
record. Except where the prosecution witness testimony, if credible by itself,
was extensively cross-examined on the shall be sufficient to support a
material points and thereafter failed to appear finding of fact, conclusion, or
and cannot be produced despite a warrant for judgment subject to the
his arrest. standard of proof required in
criminal and non-criminal cases
(Sec. 22 of the Rule on
PARTY CALLING THE FOLLOWING examination of a child witness)
WITNESSES ARE NOT BOUND BY THEIR
TESTIMONY:
1) adverse party; What is a Misleading question?

2) hostile witness; Answer: one which assumes as true a fact
3) unwilling witness. not yet testified to by the witness or contrary
to that which he has previously stated. It is
Hostile witness- a witness may be NOT allowed.
considered as unwilling or hostile only if so
declared by the court upon adequate showing
of:  Only one counsel should be allowed to
a) his adverse interest examine a witness in a single stage.
b) unjustified reluctance to testify However, the other counsel may make
c) or his having mislead the party into objection to testimony.
calling him to the witness stand. REASONS:
1) To protect the witness from
Section 9. Recalling witness undue and confusing
interrogation; and
GENERAL RULE: After the examination of a 2) To secure system and brevity
witness by both sides has been concluded, by giving the control of the
the witness cannot be recalled without leave interrogation to a single hand.
of court.
When Questions preliminary?
EXCEPTION: Answer: When the question does not touch
1) The examination has not been concluded; on any issue.
and
2) recall has nor been expressly reserved with A question that merely suggests a
the approval of the court. subject without suggesting an answer or
a specific thing is not a leading question.
Section 10. Leading and Misleading Example: “State whether anything occurred
questions between you and the defendants on the
evening of January 9, 1913.”
What is a leading question?
Answer: Questions which suggest to the Section 11. Impeachment of adverse
witness the answer which the examining party party’s witness.
desires.
WAYS OF IMPEACHING ADVERSE PARTY’S
May a leading Question be allowed? WITNESS:
Answer: As a rule, leading questions may not 1) By contradictory evidence;
be allowed. But there are exceptions like: 2) By evidence that the general
a) on cross examination; reputation for truth, honesty, or
b) on preliminary matters; integrity of the witness is bad; or
c) When there is difficulty in getting 3) By prior inconsistent statements.
direct and intelligible answers from a
witness who is ignorant, or a child of PROCEDURE FOR IMPEACHING WITNESS
tender years, or is of feeble mind, or a BY EVIDENCE OF PRIOR INCONSISTENT
deaf-mute; STATEMENTS (“LAYING THE PREDICATE”)
d) Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or 1. The statement must be related to him
e) Of a witness who is an adverse party with the circumstances of the times
or an officer, director, or managing and places and the persons present;
agent of a public or private corporation - if the statement be in writing
or of a partnership or association they must be shown to the
which is an adverse party. (Sec. 10) witness before any question is
put to him concerning them; is the testimony of evidence is the

and the witness and memorandum
2. He must be asked whether he made the memorandum
such statements, and if so, allowed to • The witness simply • Witness must swear
explain it. testifies that he that the writing
knows that the correctly states the
NOTE: Where the previous statements of a memorandum is transaction.
witness are offered as evidence of an correctly written
admission, and not merely to impeach him, by him or under his
the rule on laying the predicate does not direction; no need
apply. to swear.
May a party impeach his own witness?  The memorandum from which
Answer: As a rule no, except, if the witness is the witness may be permitted to refresh
an unwilling or hostile witness or if the his memory need not be an original
witness is an adverse party or an officer, writing. It is sufficient if it is shown that
director, or managing agent of a public or the witness knows the copy to be a true
private corporation or of a partnership or one, and his memory refreshed thereby
association which is an adverse party. enables him to testify from his own
(Sec.12) recollection of the facts, independent of
his confidence in the accuracy of the copy.
Section 13. How witness impeached by
evidence of inconsistent statements. State the rule when part of an act,
declaration or writing is given in
In case of a hostile witness evidence by one party
Where the witness is the adverse party or the Answer: When part of an act, declaration,
representative of a judicial person which is conversation, writing or record is given in
the adverse party; and evidence by one party, the whole of the same
When the witness is not voluntarily offered subject may be inquired into by the other, and
but is required by law to be presented by the when a detached act, declaration,
proponent as in the case of subscribing conversation, writing or record is given in
witness. evidence, any other act, declaration,
conversation, writing or record necessary to
May evidence of good moral character of an its understanding may also be given in
accused be presented? evidence. (Sec. 17)
Answer: As a rule, no. Evidence of the good
character of a witness is not admissible until State the nature of the rule “falsus in
such character has been impeached. (Sec. 14) uno, falsus in omnibus”
Answer: The rule does nor really lay down a
Section 16. When witness may refer to categorical test of credibility. (People vs.
memorandum. Manalasan, 189 SCRA 619; See also People
vs. Letigo, etal., G.R.No. 112968, Feb. 13,
REVIVAL OF PRESENT MEMORY/PRESENT 1997). It is not a positive rule of law or of
RECOLECTION REVIVED-a witness may be universal application. It should not be applied
allowed to refresh his memory respecting a to portions of the testimony corroborated by
fact, by anything written or recorded by other evidence, particularly where the false
himself or under his direction as the time portions could be innocent mistakes.
when the fact occurred, or immediately Moreover, the rule is not mandatory but
thereafter. merely sanctions a disregard of the testimony
of a witness if the circumstances so warrant.
PAST RECOLLECTION RECORDED/REVIVAL To completely disregard all the testimony of a
OF PAST RECOLLECTION- a witness may witness on this ground, his testimony must
also testify from such writing or record, have been false on material point and the
though he retains no recollection of the witness must have a conscious and deliberate
particular facts, if he is able to swear that the intention to falsify a material point.
writing or record correctly stated the It has been held that as long as the
transaction when made, but such evidence mass of testimony jibes on material points,
must be received with caution. the slight clashing statements dilute neither
the credibility nor the veracity of the
PRESENT MEMORY PAST testimony. Inconsistencies and contradictions
REVIVED RECOLLECTION on minor details do not impair the credibility
RECORDED of witnesses as they are but natural they even
• Memory is obscure • Recollection is zero enhance credibility as these discrepancies
but there is still indicate that the response are honest and
memory unrehearsed. (People vs. Pacapac, et al., 63
• The main evidence • The main SCAD 173, G.R. No. 90623, Sept. 7. 1995)
 For the purpose of their presentation in

What are the components of evidence, documents are either in
identification testimony? public or private (Sec. 19).
Answer: Identification testimony has at least
three (3) components(which may be the PUBLIC DOCUMENTS:
causes of misidentification): 1. The written official acts, or records of
1) Witnessing a crime, whether as a the official acts of the sovereign
victim or a bystander, involves authority, official bodies and tribunals,
perception of an event actually and public officers, whether of the
occurring; Philippines, or of a foreign country;
2) The witness must memorize details of 2. Documents acknowledged before a
the event; and notary public except last wills and
3) The witness must be able to recall and testimonies; and
communicate accurately. 3. Public records, kept in the Philippines,
Danger of unreliability in eyewitness of private documents required by law
testimony arises at each of these three to be entered therein.
stages, for whenever people attempt
to acquire, retain and retrieve How may a private document be proved
information accurately, they are before it is admitted in evidence?
limited by normal human fallibilities Answer: Before any private document
and suggestive influences. (People vs. offered as authentic is received in evidence,
Teehankee, 64 SCAD 808, G.R. its due execution and authenticity must be
Nos.111206-08, Oct 6, 1995) proved either:
a) by anyone who saw the document
What are the ways of out-court identification executed or written; or
of suspects conducted by the police? b) by evidence of the genuineness of the
Answer: signature or handwriting of the maker.
1) Show-ups, where the suspect alone is Any other private document
brought face to face with the witness need only be identified as that which it is
for identification. claimed to be. (Sec. 20)
2) Mug shots, where the photographs are
shown to the witness to identify the
suspect; and PUBLIC WRITING DISTINGUISHED
3) Line-ups, where a witness identifies FROM PRIVATE WRITING:
the suspect from a group of persons
lined up for the purpose of
identification. (People vs. Teehankee, PUBLIC PRIVATE
supra.) WRITING WRITING
As to • a public • a private
authentic document is writing must
ity admissible be proved
Section 17. When part of transaction, evidence, relative to its
writing or record given in evidence, the without due
remainder admissible. further execution
proof of its and
RULE ON COMPLETENESS: When Part of an genuinenes genuineness-
act, declaration, conversation, writing or s and due its
record is given in evidence by one party, the execution authenticity
whole of the same subject may be inquired before it may
into by the other, and when a detached act, be received
declaration, conversation, writing, or record is in evidence.
given in evidence, any other act, declaration, As to • a public • a private
conversation, writing or recode necessary persons instrument is writing binds
may also be given in evidence. bound evidence only the
even against parties who
third executed
AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF persons, of them or their
DOCUMENTS the fact privies
which gave insofar as
Section 19. Classes of documents. rise to its due
AUTHENTICATION-PROVING the due due execution
execution and genuineness of the document. execution and date of
and to the the
CLASSES OF DOCUMENTS: date of the document
latter are
concerned.
As to • certain
validity transactions To be admissible in
of certain must be in a evidence, what are the
transacti public requisites that must be present
ons document, for dying declaration to be
otherwise admissible in evidence
they will not The dying declaration
be given any must:
validity a.. concern the cause and
surrounding circumstances of
the
The following are private writings which declarant’s death
may be admitted in evidence without b. that at the time it was
previous proof of its authenticity and made, the declarant was
due execution: under a consciousness of
1. When the genuineness and due impending death
execution of the document is admitted c. that he was a competent
by the adverse party; witness
2. When such genuineness and due d. that his declaration is
execution are immaterial to the issue; offered in evidence in a
3. When the document is an ANCIENT criminal case for homicide,
DOCUMENT. murder or parricide in
which the declarant is the
NOTE: Ancient Document Rule applies only if victim; and
there are no other witnesses to determine e. the declaration must be
authenticity. complete
 A dying declaration
RULE 130, Sec. 34 may be oral or
written
When may previous conduct or act be
received in evidence? 2. Declaration against interest- the
When they are offered to prove a declaration made by a person
specific intent or knowledge, identity, plan, deceased, or unable to testify, against
system, scheme, habit, custom or usage, and the interest of the declarant, if the fact
the like. (Sec. 34, Rule 130) asserted in the declaration was at the
time it was made so far contrary to
If an offer to pay money in writing is rejected declarant’s own interest, that a
without valid cause, what is the rule? reasonable man in his position would
An offer in writing to pay a particular not have made the declaration unless
sum of money or to deliver a written he believed it to be true, may be
instrument or specific personal property is, if received in evidence against himself or
rejected without valid cause, equivalent to the his successors in interest and against
actual production and tender of the money, third persons.
instrument, or property. (Sec. 35, Rule 130)
3. Act or declaration about pedigree- the
What is the Hearsay Rule? act or declaration of a person
A witness can testify only to those deceased, or unable to testify, in
facts which he knows of his personal respect to the pedigree of another
knowledge; that is, which are derived from his person related to him by birth or
own perception, except as provided in the marriage, may be received in evidence
rules. where it occurred before the
controversy, and the relationship
What is hearsay evidence? between the two persons is shown by
Hearsay derived not through the evidence other than such act or
perception of the person testifying but declaration. The word pedigree
acquired through information from others. includes relationship, family
genealogy, birth, marriage, death, the
Are there exceptions to the Hearsay Rule? dates when and the places where
Yes. They are: these facts occurred, and the names of
1. Dying declaration- the declaration of a the relatives. It embraces also facts of
dying person, made under the family history intimately connected
consciousness of an impending death, with pedigree.
may be received in any case wherein
his death is the subject of inquiry, as
evidence of the cause and surrounding 4. Family reputation or tradition
circumstances of such death. regarding pedigree- the reputation or
tradition existing in a family previous published for use by persons engaged

to the controversy, in respect to the in that occupation and is generally
pedigree of any one of its members, used and relied upon by them therein.
may be received in evidence if the
witness, testifying thereon be also a 10.Learned treatises- a published treaties,
member of the family, either by periodical or pamphlet on
consanguinity or affinity. Entries in a subject of history, law, science, or art
family bibles or other family books or is admissible as tending to
charts, engravings on rings, family prove the truth of a matter stated
portraits and the like, may be received therein if the court takes judicial
as evidence of pedigree. notice, or a witness expert in the
subject testifies, that the writer of the
5. Common reputation- Common statement in the treatise, periodical or
reputation existing previous to the pamphlet is recognized in his
controversy, respecting facts of public profession or calling as expert in the
or general interest more than 30 years subject.
old, or respecting marriage or moral
character, may be given in evidence. 11. Testimony or deposition at a former
Monuments and inscriptions in public proceeding- the testimony or deposition of a
places may be received as evidence of witness deceased or unable to testify, given in
common reputation. a former case or proceeding, judicial or
administrative, involving the same parties and
subject matter, may be given in evidence
6. Part of res gestae- statements made against the adverse party who had the
by a person while a startling opportunity to cross examine him.
occurrence is taking place or
immediately prior to or subsequent What is the Opinion Rule-the opinion of
thereto with respect to the a witness is not admissible. Is this absolute?
circumstances thereof, may be given No, there are exceptions and they are the
in evidence as part of the res gestae. following:
So, also, statements accompanying an 1. If the
equivocal act material to the issue, witness is an expert
and giving it a legal significance, may 2. if witness is
be received as part of re gestae. an ordinary witness, it may be
received in evidence only on
7. Entries in the course of business- matters regarding:
entries made at, or near the time of i. the
the transactions to which they refer, by identity of a person
a person deceased, or unable to about whom he has
testify, who was in a position to know adequate knowledge
the facts therein stated, may be ii. a
received as prima facie evidence, if handwriting with which
such person made the entries in his he has sufficient
professional capacity or in the familiarity and
performance of duty and in the iii. the
ordinary or regular course of business mental sanity of a
or duty. person with whom he is
sufficiently acquainted.
The witness may also testify on his
8. Entries in official records- entries in impressions of the emotion, behavior,
official records made in the condition or appearance of a person.
performance of his duty by a public
officer of the Philippines, or by a Is character Evidence admissible?
person in the performance of a duty As a rule, no. The exceptions are;
specially enjoined by la, are prima a. In criminal cases:
facie evidence of the facts therein i. the accused may prove his
stated. good moral character which
is pertinent to the moral
9. commercial lists and the like- trait involved in the offense
evidence of statements of matters of charged;
interest to persons engaged in an ii. unless in rebuttal, the
occupation contained in alist, register, prosecution may not prove
periodical or other published his bad moral character
compilation is admissible as tending to which is pertinent to the
prove the truth of any relevant matter moral trait involved in the
so stated if that compilation is offense charged;
iii. the good or bad moral

character of the offended ANS.: No, they did not have such personal
party may be proved if it knowledge. Lumibao, the marketing assistant
tends to establish in any of Pet. Corporation had no part in the
reasonable degree the preparation of the bill of loading and the Draft
probability or improbability Survey Report prepared by OMIC. Nor was he
of the offense charged. present when the copper concentrates were
b. In civil cases loaded on the vessel or when the cargo was
Evidence of the moral character unloaded in Japan. He merely relied on the
of aparty in a civil case is declarations made by other persons that
admissible only when pertinent 2,243.496 wet metric tons were indeed
to the issue of character loaded and that the cargo was short by 355
involved in the case. metric tons when unloaded in Japan.
c. Evidence of the good character of a The same maybe said of witness
witness is not admissible until such Cayabyab. While present at the loading site
character has been impeached. and familiar with the procedure followed in
loading the cargo, he admitted that he could
not state for certain that no spillage occurred
as his attention was not at all times focused
TESTIMONIAL KNOWLEDGE on the loading operation. Moreover, none of
the documents he identified were signed by
Sec. 36-41, RULE 130 him. He only witnessed the signing of these
documents by other people. Hence, he was in
HEARSAY EVIDENCE no position to testify as to the truth or falsity
of the figures contained therein.
One whose probative force depends in The testimonies of these witnesses
whole or in part on the competency and were thus HEARSAY. It has been held; any
credibility of some persons other than the evidence, whether oral or documentary, is
witness by whom it is sought to produce it. HEARSAY if its probative value is not based on
the personal knowledge of the witness but on
HEARSAY EVIDENCE RULE the knowledge of another person who is not
on the witness stand. Hearsay evidence,
“A witness can testify only to those whether objected to or not, has no probative
facts which he knows of his personal value unless the proponent can show that the
knowledge; that is, which are derived from his evidence falls within the exceptions to the
own perception, except as otherwise provided hearsay evidence rule. (Benguet Exploration,
in these rules.” Inc. Vs. CA, February 9, 2001).
Thus,hearsay evidence is inadmissible.
REASON FOR THE RULE Q: Petitioner was convicted for the crime
of murder before the lower courts. He
The declarant is not present and now appeals to the Supreme Court,
available for cross-examination in violation of presenting an affidavit executed by a
the other party’s right to confront and cross- certain Elena de Sagun vda. De Gatdula,
examine the witness. stating that her late husband admitted
to her the killing of a certain person by
FORM OF HEARSAY EVIDENCE the name of Mario Anacay, the victim in
this case. Is Elena’s affidavit admissible?
May be oral/verbal or in writing.
ANS.: NO, for it is patently hearsay. It
appears therein that she learned of the
identity of the alleged culprit when her
Q: Private Respondent Corporation was husband, who died in 1983, purportedly
chartered by Petitioner Corporation to admitted to her of having killed Mario Anacay
transport copper concentrates. The on May 24, 1981. In other words, she had no
cargo was loaded on board at Poro Point, personal knowledge of the killing of Mario
San Fernando, La Union and unloaded in Anacay except for the information allegedly
Japan. An alleged shortage was revealed to her by her late husband. It is an
reported. Petitioner made a claim for established doctrine that when the evidence
loss which respondent refused to pay. is based on what was supposedly told the
Thus, this suit for damages. The issue witness, the same is without any evidentiary
here is whether or not petitioner’s value or weight, being patently hearsay.
witnesses had personal knowledge of (Barrera Vs. People, February 19, 2001).
the actual weight of copper concentrate
loaded on the vessel and discharged in
Japan. INDEPENDENTLY RELEVANT STATEMENT
the first time on appeal, yet if the

One made by a third person intended evidence is hearsay, it has no
not to establish the truth of the facts asserted probative value and should be
in that statement, but only to prove the tenor disregarded, whether objected to
of the statement. or not.
MULTIPLE HEARSAY/HEARSAY TWICE

DOCTRINE OF INDEPENDENTLY REMOVED
RELEVANT STATEMENT
 A hearsay declaration, which within
Where, regardless of the truth or itself contains a hearsay statement.
falsity of a statement, the fact that it has  Admissible if it falls under the
been made is relevant, the hearsay rule does exceptions to the hearsay rule.
not apply, but the statement may be shown.
Evidence as to the making of such statement EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE:
is not secondary but primary, for the 1. Dying Declaration
statement itself may constitute a fact in issue 2. Declaration Against Interest
or be circumstantially relevant as to the 3. Act or Declaration About Pedigree
existence of such fact. 4. Family Reputations or Tradition Regarding
Pedigree
i.e. where statement is the fact in issue: 5. Common Reputation
-In a prosecution for slander, a witness 6. Part of the Res Gestae
may testify that he heard the accused utter 7. Entries In The Course of Business
the slanderous words, for the making of the 8. Entries in Official Records
statements is the principal fact in issue, and 9. Commercial Lists And The Like
witness is called upon to testify as to a matter 10. Learned Treatises
within his personal knowledge. There is here 11. Testimony or Deposition At A Former
no question of hearsay involved. Proceeding
i.e. where statement is a circumstantial

evidence:
1. DYING DECLARATION/ANTE
MORTEM STATEMENT/STATEMENT
IN ARTICULO MORTIS.
1. Statements of a person showing his
Statement made by a person
state of mind, knowledge, belief,
after the mortal wound has been
intention, ill will and other
inflicted, under a belief that death is
emotions.
certain, stating the facts concerning
2. Statements of a person, which
the cause of and the circumstances
show his physical condition, as
surrounding the homicide.
illness and the like.
3. Statements of a person from which
REASONS FOR THE
an inference may be made as to
ADMINISSIBILITY OF DYING
the state of mind of another, that
DECLARATIONS:
is, knowledge, belief, motive, good
or bad faith, etc. of the latter. 1. NECESSITY – Because the
4. Statements, which may identify the declarant’s death renders
date, place and person in question. impossible his taking the witness
5. Statements showing the lack of stand and it often happens that
credibility of a witness. there is no other equally
satisfactory proof of the crime.
• MAY OBJECTION TO THE
ADMISSION OF HEARSAY 2. TRUSTWORTHINESS – The
EVIDENCE BE RAISED FOR THE declaration is made in extremity,
FIRST TIME ON APPEAL? when the party is at the point of
NO. The failure of a death and every hope of this world
party to object to the admission of is gone; when every motive to
hearsay evidence constitutes a falsehood is silenced and the mind
waiver of his right to make such is induced by the most powerful
objection, and consequently, the consideration to speak the truth.
evidence offered may be admitted.
REQUISITE OF A DYING
• WHAT WEIGHT IS GIVEN DECLARATION
TO HEARSAY EVIDENCE ADMITTED 1. The declaration must relate to the
WITHOUT OBJECTION? cause and surrounding circumstances
Our Supreme Court held of the declarant’s death (how, where,
that although the question of when, why, by whom).
admissibility can not be raised for
NOTE: statements referring to the time the statement was made and not
antecedents of the fatal encounter or the rapid succession of death, that
opinions, impressions or conclusions of renders the dying declaration
the declarant are not admissible. admissible. (People Vs. Sabio, January
27, 1981).
2. The declaration must have been
made under the consciousness of an ** However, the interval of time
impending death, taking into between the declaration and
consideration: the death of the declarant may
be taken into account where
a. The words or statements the declaration is ambiguous as
made by the person or any to whether the declarant
conduct or actions or believed that his death was
acknowledgment that he is imminent when he made such
going to die. (There is declaration.
abandonment of the hope of Thus, where the declarant
survival.) stated that he would not die if
treated, such statement
b. Seriousness or gravity of the indicates an awareness of
wound death and the nature of his
-However, should the wound and his death an hour
victim express hope of later qualifies such statement
recovery, despite the into a dying declaration or at
seriousness of his wounds, any least as part of the res gestae
statement he makes would not (People Vs. Antonio, Aug. 25,
be considered a dying 1970).
declaration. Where, shortly after he was
wounded, the victim was asked
2. The declarant’s death is the subject as to whether he would die and
of inquiry (both in civil and criminal which he replied “I cannot
cases) ascertain” and he died the
following day, his statement is
3. The declarant is competent as a admissible both as part of the
witness at the time of the declaration. res gestae and as dying
declaration (People Vs. Gueron,
NOTE: It is not necessary that if he March 25, 1983).
survives, he is competent. It is enough But where the victim, when
that he is competent at the time of the asked as to whether he thought
declaration. he would die replied “I don’t
know” his declaration was not
4. The declaration should have been made under the consciousness
made freely and voluntarily. of his imminent death and does
not qualify as an ante mortem
5. The victim must die but need not be statement, although the same
immediately. was admitted as part of the res
gestae since it was made
NOTE: immediately after the incident.
The intervening time from the making (People Vs. Laquinon, Feb. 28,
of the declaration up to the actual 1985.)
death of the declarant is immaterial, as
long as the declaration was made DESTRUCTION OF THE PROBATIVE
under the consciousness of impending VALUE OF A DYING DECLARATION:
death (US Vs. Mallari, 29 Phil. 14)
which is a question of fact for the trial HOW?
court to determine (People Vs. Extra 1. Impeach the testimony
July 30, 1976) and as long as no i.e. Show that the
retraction was made by the declarant declaration was made out of
until his demise. Where the gravity of hatred or that the wound of
the wound did not diminish, the the declarant could have
admissibility of the dying declaration is deranged his mental
not affected by the fact that the faculties.
declarant died hours or days later
(People Vs. Devaras et al, February 27, 2. Prove the falsehood of the
1971) or even 14 days later (People declaration
Vs. Jacinto, November 29, 1984). It is i.e. The use of profane
the belief in impending death at the language; statements which
contradict the dying constitute the ges restae of the subject of

declaration; establish the declarant’s statement, but is should
nature and extent of the express in full all that he intended to say
inquiry. as conveying his meaning in respect of
such fact. It must include all that the
3. Attack the witness, that is, if declarant wished or intended to include
he actually heard the (People Vs. de Joya, Nov. 8, 1991).
declaration.
2. DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST
-Admissible in evidence if the declarant

• FORM OF A DYING dies, become insane or is not available as a
DECLARATION witness.
It needs not be in -Admissible in its entirety including
any particular form. A dying parts not against interest if the latter are
declaration may be a substantially connected with the subject
communication by means of matter as that covered by the part against
signs, an oral statement, a interest.
mere formal statement, or
answers to questions put by
the person to whom the
declaration is made, writing
signed by the declarant or Admission Declaration
an affidavit. Against
1. Person Interest
If the dying making the
declaration has been made statement is 1. The
orally, it may be proved by alive declarant is
the testimony of the witness 2. Person dead, in sane
who heard the same or to admitting is or is unable to
whom it was made. The a party to a testify.
better practice is for the case 2. Person
witness to repeat what the 3. Used admitting
declarant said. Where the against the need not be a
declaration is made by person party to the
question and answer, the admitting case
entire conversation, and those 3. Used
question and the answer, identified against third
should be given so far as with him persons
possible. 4. Primary
Evidence 4. Secondar
But if the witness cannot state y evidence
the exact language of the declarant, (used only if
he may state the substance of the 5. Not the declarant
declaration, although subject to necessarily is dead,
criticism as to its accuracy. against interest insane or
unable to
Where the dying declaration testify.
was reduced to writing and 5. Against
signed/approved by the declarant, it interest
must be proved by the writing itself,
which must be authenticated and
proved as any document offered in
evidence. The writing is the best
evidence. But where the absence of
the original writing has been
satisfactorily accounted for, the
declaration may be established by • SELF SERVING
secondary evidence. DECLARATION
-Is a statement
• DOCTRINE OF favorable to the interest of
COMPLETENESS OF DYING the declarant. It is not
DECLARATION admissible in evidence as
A dying declaration must be proof of the facts asserted
complete. To be complete does not mean since its introduction in
that it should contain everything that
evidence would open the 3. ACT OR DECLARATION ABOUT

door to frauds and perjuries. PEDIGREE
PEDIGREE - is the history of family

SCOPE OF THE RULE: descent, which is transmitted from one
a. DECLARATION AGAINST MORAL generation to another by both oral and
INTEREST written declaration and by traditions. It
-i.e. acknowledgement of a includes relationship, family
natural child. genealogy, birth, marriage, death,
dates and places where the facts
b. DECLARATION AGAINST occurred, names of relatives.
PECUNIARY INTEREST – Those
which may bar in whole or in REASONS FOR ADMISSIBILITY OF
part the declarant’s money DECLARATIONS REGARDING
claim or which may give rise to PEDIGREE:
a monetary claim against him.
1. NECESSITY – Because facts
c. DECLARATION AGAINST
occurred many years before trial
PROPRIETARY INTEREST
and were known to only a few
-Those, which are at variance
people.
with the declarant’s property
2. TRUSTWORTHINESS – The “natural
rights.
effusions” of those who talk over
family affairs when no special
reason for bias or passion exists,
d. DECLARATION AGAINST PENAL
are family trustworthy.
INTEREST
-i.e. Acknowledgement of the
commission of the crime.
REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY:
REQUISITES FOR THE
ADMISSIBILITY:
1. Declarant is dead or unable to
testify.
1. Declarant is not available to
2. Pedigree is in issue.
testify.
3. Declarant must be a relative of the
-Dead, insane/mentally
person whose pedigree is in
incapacitated, physically
question (relationship may be by
incompetent, of advanced
birth or affinity).
age, has lost the power of
4. Declaration must be made before
speech.
the controversy occurred (ante
2. The declaration must
litem motam)
concern facts cognizable by
5. The relationship between the
the declarant.
declarant and the person whose
-He must have knowledge of
pedigree is in question must be
it or he has a duty to know
shown by evidence other than such
it.
act or declaration (proof of
3. The circumstance must
relationship may be either direct or
render it improbable that a
circumstantial).
motive to lie exists.
4. FAMILY REPUTATION OR
REASONS FOR THE ADMISSIBILITY
TRADITON REGARDING PEDIGREE
OFDECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST:
Such declarations and
statements as have come down
1. NECESSITY – The only mode from generation to generation from
of proof available. deceased relatives in such a way
2. TRUSTWSORTHINESS – that even though it cannot be said
Presumption that men will not or determined which of the
testify if what they will say will be deceased relatives originally made
prejudicial to their own interest. them, or was personally cognizant
of the facts therein stated, yet it
FORM OF DECLARATION appears that such declarations and
AGAINST INTEREST statements were made as family
-May be oral or written. history, ante litem motam, by a
deceased person connected by
blood or marriage with the person
whose pedigree is to be formed and person.

established. expressed of
his character.
• REQUISITE FOR
ADMISSIBILITY • REQUISITE FOR THE
1. There is controversy ADMISSIBILITY OF COMMOM
with respect to the REPUTATION RESPECTING FACTS OF A
pedigree of any PUBLIC OR GENERAL INTEREST.
member of a family. 1. The facts must be of
2. The reputation or public or general interest and more
tradition of the than 30 years old.
pedigree of the  MATTERS OF
person concerned PUBLIC INTEREST –common to
existed previous to all the citizens of the state or to
the controversy. the entire people. i.e. public
3. The witness boundaries
testifying to the  MATTERS OF
reputation or GENERAL INTEREST – common
tradition regarding only to a single community or
the pedigree of the to a considerable number of
person concerned persons forming part of the
must be a member community.
of the family of said
person, either by 2. The common reputation
consanguinity of must have been ancient, that is, more
affinity. than 30 years old.
5. COMMON REPUTATION 3. The reputation must

-Means have been one formed among a class
general reputation; opinion or of persons who were in a position to
belief formed by others have some sources of information and
to contribute intelligently to the
-Admissible to prove:
formation of the opinion.
a. Facts of public or
general interest
4. The common reputation
more than thirty
must have been existing previous to
years old
the controversy.
b. Marriage
c. Moral character
HOW PROVEN?
*REASON FOR ADMISSIBILITY: -By the
testimony of witnesses, old maps and
1. NECESSITY – arising from old surveys, monuments and
the inherent difficulty of inscriptions in public places.
obtaining any other
evidence other than that in *REQUISITE FOR ADMISSIIBILITY
the nature of common OF COMMON REPUTATION
reputation. RESPECTING MARRIAGE
1. The common reputation
2. TRUSTWORTHINESS – must have been formed
arising from the a) the previous to the controversy;
public’s general interest
therein; b) the fact that the 2. The common reputation
falsity or error of such must have been formed in the
evidence could be community or among the class
expressed or corrected by of persons who are in a position
other testimony since the to have sources of information
public are interested in the and to contribute intelligently to
same. the formation of the opinion.
REPUTATION *REQUISITE FOR THE
-It applies to CHARACTER ADMISSIBILITY OF COMMON
the opinion -It refers to REPUTATION RESPECTING MORAL
which others the inherent CHARACTER:
may have qualities of the
1. That it is the reputation inducing emotional

in the place where the person in exclamations or nervous
question is best known; excitement without the
exercise of sufficient efforts on
2. That it was formed the part of the spectator. i.e.
before the controversy collusion.
occurred; 2. The statement must be
spontaneous – Made
6. PART OF THE RES GESTAE immediately during, before or
after the startling
“RES GESTAE” occurrence/instinctive, not a
-Things done product of analysis, deductive
- Event speaking or inductive reasoning.
through the mouth of another NOTE:
-Things done, The circumstances
spontaneous statement or utterances made immediately surrounding the
during the act or transaction in question
occurrence of the event. and the conditions immediately
preceding and following it may
RATIONALE FOR ADMISSION ordinarily be shown as part of
the res gestae, unless some
-Statement made instinctively at the other rule of exclusions such as
time of a specific transaction or event, the one excluding parol
without the opportunity for formulation evidence, would be violated
of statements favorable to one’s own thereby.
cause are likely to cast important light
upon the matter in issue; as to such 3. The statement must relate to
statement, the law creates a the circumstances of the
presumption of their truthfulness. startling occurrence.
-They must be relevant to
and must explain and
PARTS OF THE RES GESTAE illustrate the facts of the
transaction in issue.
1. SPONTANEOUS STATEMENT
- Statements/exclamations DYING RES GESTAE
made immediately after some DECLARATION
existing occasions by a -Can be made by
participant or spectator and -Can be made only the killer himself
asserting the circumstances of by the victim. after or during the
that occasion as it is observed killing or that of a
by him. third person.
-Made only after
- Words, exclamations, the homicidal -Statement may
utterances while a attack has been precede,
startling occurrence is committed. accompany or be
taking place before or made after the
after (statements related homicidal act was
to the event) i.e. “You’re -Its committed.
driving fast!” trustworthiness is
based upon its -Based on the
2.VERBAL ACTS being given under spontaneity of the
- Equivocal acts which are an awareness of statement
susceptible of different impending death.
interpretations. NOTE:
- i.e. “A” gave money to
“B”. This may mean payment While the statements of the victim
of debt or for safekeeping, a may not generally qualify as a dying
bribery, etc. declaration because it was not made
under the consciousness of impending
*REQUISITE FOR ADMISSIBILITTY death, it may still be admissible as part
OF SPONTANEOUS STATEMENTS: of the res gestae if it was made
immediately after the incident. However,
1. There must be a startling where the elements of both are present,
occurrence – sudden the statement may be admitted both as
occurrence of an event or a dying declaration and as part the res
happening, which is capable of gestae.
4. The presence or absence of

intervening occurrences between the
*FACTORS TO CONSIDER IN occurrence and the statement relative
DETERMINING THE SPONTANEITY OF A thereto.
STATEMENT: -i.e. attention to other
matters, receipt of medical assistance.
1. Time Element – The time that elapsed
between the occurrence of the act or
transaction and the making of the 5. The nature and circumstances of the
statement. statement itself.
-The interval of time
between the startling occurrence *REQUISITES FOR THE ADMISSIBILITY OF
and the statement depends upon VERBAL ACTS:
the circumstances, but such
statement must have been made 1. Act or occurrence characterized
while the declarant was under the must be equivocal, (ambiguous,
immediate influence of the vague, doubtful, not clear)
startling occurrence, hence, it is
generally required to have been 2. Verbal acts must characterize or
made immediately prior or explain the equivocal act. I.e.
subsequent to the event. “This is in payment of my debt.”
However, if the declarant
was rendered unconscious after 3. Equivocal act must be relevant to
the startling occurrence, his the issue.
statements relative thereto upon
regaining consciousness are still 4. Verbal act must be
part of the res gestae regardless contemporaneous with equivocal
of the time that intervened in act. –Declaration must accompany
between. the act they describe or relate to
If the statement was made and be made simultaneously with
under the influence of a startling its occurrence or so near thereto
event and the declarant did not as to form a part thereof.
have the opportunity to concoct or
contrive a story, even if made 9 7. ENTRIES IN THE COURSE OF BUSINESS
hours after the killing, the
statement is admissible as part of *RATIONALE FOR ADMISSION:
the res gestae (People Vs. 1. NECESSITY – best available
Berame, July 30, 1976). However, evidence
the element of spontaneity is 2. TRUSTWORTHINESS
lacking in the alleged ante-
mortem statement taken some 39 *REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY:
hours after the incident. Thirty- 1. The person who made the entry
nine hours is too long a time to be must be dead or unable to
considered subsequent testify.
immediately to the startling
occurrence. Even as contemplated 2. The entries were made at or
by the rules, statements given a near the time of the
day after the incident in answer to transactions to which they
questions propounded by an refer.
investigator cannot be considered -Contemporaneous with the
part of the res gestae (People Vs. time of transaction.
Precadios, Jan. 5, 2001). -The entries, however, need
not be made at the time of the
2. The place where the statement was occurrence to which they relate
made. or even on the same day, but it
-It should be made in the is sufficient if they are made
crime scene. If in another place, it within a reasonable time
becomes doubtful. thereafter, in the ordinary
course of the business of the
3. The condition of the declarant when party making them.
he made the statement.
-i.e. just receive serious 3. The entrant was in a position
injury, suffering severe pain or to know the facts stated in the
was under intense excitement. entries.
-However, if the entry is based
on reports, oral or written of
numerous persons cooperating i.e. Keeping of police

who had personal knowledge of blotters; NBI; Prosecutor’s
their own items, but did not office.
themselves make the entries,
the entries may be received, c) When the keeping of the
either by calling the entrant records is required by
alone to the stand or by the superiors.
testimony of one who can
verify the method of compiling 2. The entrant had personal
them. knowledge of the facts stated by
him or such facts were acquired by
4. The entries were made in his him from reports made by persons
professional capacity or in the under a legal duty to submit the
performance of a duty, whether same.
legal, contractual, moral or
religious. -Personal knowledge: through his
senses
5. The entries were made in the -Official knowledge: subordinates
ordinary or regular course of are duty bound to report the facts
business or duty. needed with utmost honesty. The
knowledge of the subordinate is
NOTE: knowledge of the superior.
If the entrant is available as i.e. Sheriff’s return, return of
a witness, the said entries will not search warrant, election returns.
be admitted as exception to the
hearsay rule, but they may 3. Such entries were duly entered in
nevertheless be availed of by said a regular manner in the official
entrant as a memorandum to records.
refresh his memory while
testifying on the transactions HOW ARE OFFICIAL ENTRIES PROVED?
reflected. 1. Production of the books or
records themselves.
2. Production of a copy certified
8. ENTRIES IN OFFICIAL RECORDS. by the legal keeper thereof.
-Made in the performance of the
duties by a public officer or by a person 9. LEARNED TREATISES
in the performance of a duty specially
enjoined by law. Such are prima facie TREATISES –works done by
evidence of the facts stated therein. experts, which are published. The author
They are presumed to be true until and must be acknowledged as an expert.
unless rebutted.
EXPERTS – authors recognized in
** The official need not be dead or their own fields.
unable to testify. Just present the i.e. dictionaries, encyclopedia,
records in court; the official need not be compendium by Regalado
called to testify.
RATIONALE FOR ADMISSIBILITY:
REQUISITE FOR ADMISSIBILITY: 1. NECESSITY – Unavailability of
1. The entries were made by a public expert witness or if available the
officer in the performance of his tremendous expense in hiring
duties or by a person in the them.
performance of a duty enjoined by
law. 2. TRUSTWORTHINESS – no motive to
misrepresent.
*WHEN IS THE RECORD MADE ON
THE PERFORMANCE OF ONE’S REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY:
DUTY: 1. If the court takes judicial notice
a) When it is expressly that the writer of the statement in
required by law. i.e. records the treatise, periodical or
of death, birth, marriage. pamphlet, is recognized in his
profession or calling as expert in
b) When the nature of the the subject.
office requires the
appropriate recording of 2. A witness expert in the subject
events. testifies that the writer of the
statement in the treatise,
periodical, or pamphlet, is
recognized in his profession or 4.Opportunity of cross-
calling as expert in the subject. examination of witness
-actual cross-examination
THESIS? - NO not necessary.It is enough
that the opportunity to
cross-examine was had.
10.COMMERCIAL LISTS AND THE LIKE NOTE:
Subsequent failure or
evidence of statements of matters refusal to appear at the
of interest to persons engaged in an second trial or hostility
occupation contained in a since testifying at the first
list,register,periodical or other published trial does not amount to
compilation is admissible. inability to testify.
i.e.SCRA,journals,official
publications-Official Gazette,Phil.Reports How to introduce evidence?
-present stenographic notes
RATIONALE FOR ADMISSIBILITY: or transcript of records.But if other party
1.Necessity refuses to admit,present the
-inaccessibility of the stenographer or clerk of court.
authors,compilers or publisher in
other jurisdiction and also
because of the great practical OPINION RULE
inconvenience in summoning each
individual whose personal OPINION-an inference or conclusion
knowledge has gone to make up drawn from facts.
the final result.
-as a general rule,the opinion of a
2.Trustworthiness witness is not admissible in evidence.
-accurate and thus canbe (SEC. 48,RULE 130)
relied upon for commercial and
professional purposes. EXCEPTIONS:
1.EXPERT OPINION
-The opinion of a witness on a
11.TESTIMONY OR DEPOSITION AT A matter requiring special
FORMER PROCEEDING knowledge,skill,experience or training
which he is shown to possess may be
-the testimony in a previous case received in evidence.
may be used in a present case.
-it may be a EXPERT-one possessing ,in regard
criminal,civil,administrative or labor to a particular subject or
case so long as there was an opportunity department of human
to cross-examine. activity,knowledge not usually
acquired by other persons.
REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY:
1.The witness whose testimony is How is knowledge acquired by an
offered in evidence is dead or unable to expert?
testify. 1.Training
-insanity or mental 5.Habit
incapacity,loss of memory thru old age 2.Education
or disease. 6.Occupation
-physical disability by 3.Careful study
reason of sickness or advanced age 7.Trade
-witness is kept away by 4.Experience
contrivance of opposite party
-witness can’t be found
after diligent search. Subjects of expert testimony:
1.Handwriting 4.Typewritten
2.Identity of parties letters
-substantial identity,that 2.Ballistics 5.Drug cases
is,identity of interest. 3.Fingerprints
6.Valuationofproperties
3.Identity of issues
-need not be the principal
issue so long as similar to the previous
ones.
***CONDITIONS BEFORE AN a)he has seen the person write

EXPERT CAN TESTIFY: b)he has seen the writing purporting to
be his upon which the witness has acted
1.The issue must be one which or been charged
requires the assistance of an
expert. Ways of proving handwriting:
2.Witness must be an expert. 1.testimony of experts
-prove this by: 2.testimony of ordinary witnesses who
a)ask opponent if he has sufficient familiarity with the
accepts the witness to be an handwriting.
expert 3.comparison of genuine handwriting
b)qualify the with the questioned handwriting.
expert:show through
series of questions on
the following factors: 3.The mental sanity of a person with
1.academic background whom he is sufficiently acquainted.
2.experience -2 instances:
3.professional standing 1.Subscribing witness to the
4.training document for which its validity
5.how fair is his/her opinion is questioned.i.e.will
2.If sufficiently acquainted
**Effect of failure to qualify: i.e.members of the
-The expert’s opinion becomes that of an family,friend,neighbor,officials of
ordinary person. the barangay
STEPS: ***The opinion on a person’s

1.Qualify the witness mental condition is based on
2.Present facts and ask his the external conduct of the
opinion person.
a)ask him about matters
which he has first hand knowledge. ***The witness may also
b)ask him on the procedures testify on his impressions of
c)ask him on the facts the
arrived at and reported by emotion,behavior,condition
other experts,thru or appearance of a
hypothethical person.But not as to his
questions(assume certain motives.
facts to be true and based
on such assumed
facts,expert will arrive at an RULE 131
answer) BURDEN OF PROOF AND
d)ask his opinion on facts PRESUMPTIONS
established by evidence
**An expert can’t give an What is burden of proof?
opinion on the opinion of It is the duty of a party to present evidence on
other people. the facts in issue necessary to establish his
claim or defense by the amount of evidence
***What is the value of an expert’s required by law.
opinion?
-The court has the What does burden of evidence or burden of
discretion to weigh and rule on the going forward with the evidence mean?
opinion.Courts are not bound,the opinion It is defined as that logical necessity which
is not conclusive but merely advisory rests on a party at any particular time during
because such may be erroneous or may the trial to create a prima facie case in his
be contradicted by others. favor, or to overthrow one when created
against him.
2.OPINION OF AN ORDINARY WITNESSES
-The opinion of a witness for Burden of proof distinguished from burden of
which proper basis is given may be evidence.
received in evidence regarding: The burden of proof rests upon the
1.The identity of a person about whom prosecution from the first to the last stage, it
he has adequate knowledge. is determined by the pleadings and it never
i.e.physical features, shifts while burden of evidence shifts to the
voice, residence, address defense when prosecution establishes prima
2.A handwriting with which he has facie case and goes back to the prosecution
sufficient familiarity because: when the defense overcomes the
prosecution’s evidence, it is determined by by nature or habit, which distinguishes him

logic in the progress of the trial. from another.’
[ In Evidence, the Rule on Admissibility
What does presumption of law mean? encompasses only MORAL character. ]
It is a conclusion or deduction drawn by
reasonable and logical inference from the HOW IS CHARACTER TO BE PROVEN:
usual probabilities attendant upon associated
facts Character is to be proved only
by reputation in the community.
What are the kinds of presumptions?
The kinds are: REPUTATION DEFINED:
1. Presumption hominis or of fact –
are those which the experience of ‘Reputation’ means what a
mankind has shown to be valid, person is estimated, said, supposed , or
founded on general knowledge and thought, to be by others.
information; inferences which
naturally arise in common experience RULE: Character evidence is not, generally,
from particular circumstances or admissible. ( sec. 51 )
known facts.
2. Presumption juris or law - are EXCEPTIONS:

those which the law requires to be
drawn from the existence of a.) In Criminal Cases
established facts in the absence of
contrary evidence on the subject, 1.) The accused may prove his
deductions which the law expressly GOOD moral character which is
directs to be made from particular PERTINENT to the moral trait involved
facts. in the offense charged.
Presumption of law are usually CHARACTER MUST BE RELEVANT:

classified as follows:
1. Conclusive Only pertinent traits, those
presumptions/presumptions involved in the offense charged, are
juris et de jure provable by a defendant in a criminal
2. Disputable or rebuttable case.
presumption or presumptions
juris tantum For example, on a charge of
rape, character for chastity; on a
What is the rule on survivorship? charge of assault, character for
The rule is: peaceableness; on a charge of
1. If both were under the age of fifteen corruption, character for honesty are
years, the older is deemed to have provable.
survived;
2. If both were above the age of sixty, On the other hand, in a case of
the younger is deemed to have murder, the defendant’s character for
survived; truth is irrelevant and, therefore, not
3. If one is under fifteen and the other provable.
above sixty, the former is deemed to
have survived; REASON FOR ALLOWING ACCUSED
4. If both be over fifteen and under sixty,
and the sex be different, the male is
TO PROVE HIS GOOD MORAL
deemed to have survived, if the sex be CHARACTER:
the same, the older;
5. If one be under fifteen or over sixty, The principle upon which good
and the other between those ages, the character may be proved is that it
latter is deemed to have survived. affords a presumption against the
commission of a crime. This
presumption arises from the
RULE 130 Sec. 51 improbability, as a general rule, as
CHARACTER EVIDENCE proved by common observation and
experience, that a person who has
CHARACTER DEFINED: uniformly pursued an honest and
upright course of conduct will depart
Character is the ‘sum total of a from it and do an act so inconsistent
person’s attributes; his intellectual, emotional with it.
and psychological qualities, impressed on him
2.) UNLESS in REBUTTAL, the In summary,

PROSECUTION may not prove his i. The
(accused) BAD moral character which is accused may prove:
PERTINENT to the moral trait involved in . his own good moral character and
the offense charged. . the bad moral character of the
offended party.
REASON FOR ALLOWING ii. The
PROSECUTION TO PROVE BAD prosecution may prove:
. his own good moral character and
CHARACTER OF ACCUSED IN . the bad moral character of the
REBUTTAL: accused but only in rebuttal.
iii. Character
The object of permitting the to be proved must be relevant.
prosecution to introduce such evidence
is not for the purpose of showing the
bad character of the defendant, but it b.) In Civil Cases
is for the purpose of refuting his claim
that he has a good character and thus Evidence of the moral character of A
to prevent the court from drawing PARTY in a civil case is admissible only when
therefrom the inference that the PERTINENT to the issue of character involved
accused is innocent of the crime in the case.
charged.
` Putting character in issue ‘ or
3.) The GOOD or BAD moral ` character involved in the issue ‘ is a
character of the OFFENDED party may be technical expression which does not
proved if it tends to establish in any mean simply that character may be
reasonable degree the probability or affected by the result, but that it is of
improbability of the offense charged. particular importance in the suit itself,
as the character of the plaintiff in an
This Rule is applied with action for slander, or that of a woman
frequency in cases of homicide in an action for seduction.
and sex offenses.
In the following actions,
. In rape cases, the character of the evidence of character is admissible
woman is not ordinarily directly in because reputation or character is
issue, but evidence of previous necessarily involved:
unchastity may be circumstantially - libel & slander
relevant and admissible on the - breach of promise of marriage
question of her consent. – the defendant may justify the
breach upon the ground that he
When the woman consents to discovered the plaintiff to be of
the act, no crime of rape is committed. unchaste character & therefore
Thus, the main issue is often whether he refused to marry her.
the woman did consent. Hence, the - damages for seduction – the
woman’s disposition to unchastity actual or reputed character of
would have probative value and would the woman is at issue.
be admissible on behalf of the
accused. In summary,
i. In criminal cases, evidence of the good
. In homicide cases, if the theory of the character of the accused is admissible in
accused is that he acted in self evidence because there is a fair and just
defense, the known violent character presumption that a person of good
of the deceased is admissible to show character would not commit a crime.
that it has produced a reasonable ii. In civil cases, unless the character of a
belief of imminent danger in the mind party be directly put in issue by the
of the accused and a justifiable proceedings itself, evidence of his general
conviction that a prompt defensive character is not admissible.
action was necessary.
[ This rule does not apply to c.) In the case provided for in Rule
cases of murder. The character of the 132, section 14.
deceased in a prosecution for murder
where the killing is committed with Evidence of the good character
treachery or premeditation is of a witness is not admissible until
inadmissible. ] such character has been impeached.
The character or reputation of a be registered to be valid,the public document

witness must be attacked or impeached is the record kept in the Register of Deeds.
before testimony sustaining his character or
reputation can be admitted. Probative Value of Public Documents
1. Written Official Acts - conclusive
It is not necessary that there 3 Entries in Official Records - prima facie
shall be a successful impeachment of evidence of facts stated therein.presunied
the witness, but an attempt to correct unless otherwise proven. How? By
impeach his character, even though clear and convincing evidence
unsuccessful, warrants the introduction PROOF OF AUTHENTICITY OF PUBLIC
of testimony as to his good character. DOCUMENTS
a. Signature of the
WHAT MORAL CHARACTER OF THE WITNESS public officer b. Seal
IS INVOLVED: of the Office c.
Certification
The trait involved as a witness is that Probative value of certified true copy: it
for veracity or truth telling and that proves prima fade the original to have been in
the trait may or may not have any the public office when it was made.
probative value as to the offense Conclusive.
charged.
WHY ARE PUBLIC DOCUMENTS
CLASSES OF DOCUMENTS EXEMPTED FROM AUTHENTICATION
• Because the presumption of validity
1. PRIVATE DOCUMENTS Furthermore, the signature of the officer, as
a. Written Official Acts - court decisions, laws well as the seal of office of the public officer,
passed by Congress, orders or is considered in authentication.
proclamations of the President. Rules and
Regulations promulgated by Dept.
Secretaries, Filing of information in court, HOW ARE FOREIGN LAWS PROVEN
b. Records of Official Acts - Minutes of A. By certification of the officer having charge
meetings, conducted by Local Government of the original copy of the law, under the
Officials, sovereign body, judicial, marriage seal of the country state. B. By an official
contract, receipt(collection of money),return copy of the law, published under the
of search warrant(they conducted a search) authority of the state, and
Note : Papers or documents coming from purpoting to
public officers. if they have no reference to contain such law.
the official act of the officers are NOT public C. Testimony of an
documents. expert
How Can Official Record Can Be Proven? PRIVATE DOCUMENTS- documents

executed by a private person, without
1. .By Official Publication of the Act -
the intervention of a notary public or other
Philippine Reports, 0fficial Gazette.
persons legally authorized.
Newspapers of Genera] Circulation
IMPORTANCE OF KNOWING WHETHER A
2. By a copy attested by the Officer who has
DOCUMENT IS PUBLIC OR PRIVATE
Legal custody of the record: i.e.Certified True
Copy.signed and sealed by Public Officer • To be able to know the ff:
The copy to be taken from the custodian 1. the binding effect of the document;
must be literal copy. A mere summary of i.e., if public, it is binding to third persons; if
the contents thereof is insufficient private, it is binding between the parties only
c. Documents acknowledged before the 2. whether or not it is necessary to
notary public - documents which give rights or authenticate the document; i.e., if public,
extinguish obligations. E.g. Deed of Sale, no need to authenticate,ifprivate,must be
deed of donation, articles of incorporation. authenticated. REASONS:
easements, etc. a. Irremovab
Except: Wills and Testaments. Why? Because il of public record
they are not intended to be scrutinized by the
public.
Note: Affidavits, although notarized are not b. to
public documents. why? Because they are prevent loss of
hearsay. public record
d. Public Records kept in the Philippines of
Private Documents required by law to be kept
therein. Hence, they are private documents.
To effect their validity .however, the law
requires that they be kept as public records.
E.g. Deed of Sale of a parcel of land needs to
PUBLIC PRIVATE reckoned from execution to the date it is

DOCUMENTS DOCUMENTS being offered. It is admissible without proof
As to Admissibility -not admisssible of due execution because the witnesses are
-admissible even without proofs of no longer available.
without proof of due • Requisites:
due execution and execution a. It is in existence for 30 years or more
genuineness and b. It is genuine and found in proper custody - It
genuinene is not necessary that the person is strictly
As to Persons -only parties and
entitled to possession. It is enough if the
Bound -even their privies
person in whose custody the document is
against third
found is so connected with it that he may
persons
As to Validity of Certain Transactions reasonably be supposed to be in possession
-substantive law requires that certain with it without fraud-
transactions be in public instrument to c. It is unblemished by any alteration or any
be valid suspicious circumstance
2. When the due execution and genuineness
of the document is admitted by the adverse
Authentication: the process of showing party
before the court the due execution and 3. When the due execution and genuiuneness
genuineness of the document; the process of of the document is immaterial
proving that the document is not spurious or 4. When the document need only to be
counterfeit or that the document is the same identified
document executed by a person. 5. When the writing is a public document
HOW TO PROVE THE DUE EXECUTION 6. It is a notarial
AND AUTHENTICITY OF A PRIVATE document,acknowledged,proved or certified
DOCUMENT: • Probative value of notarial document:
1. Direct Testimony of-witness - any person prima facie evidence of the execution of
present during the execution of the same the instrument/document involved.
2. Proof of genuineness of signature or IRREMOVABILITY OF PUBLIC
handwriting of the maker- if no person can DOCUMENTS/RECORDS
be presented. How? • Reasons:
2.1. comparison with other genuine 1. To prevent inconveniences on the part of
documents which are in the the legal custodian, i.e. disruption of work
handwriting of the person or the court 2. To prevent counterfeiting Joss or
2.2 . familiarity of the handwriting - those destruction of public documents - if
who are familiar with the handwriting of document is brought out. the one who took
the it out may be held liable for infidelity of
person; public record
2.3 . testimony of those who have seen the
person write Exception to the Rule of Irremovability -
2.4 . testimony of an expert Upon order of the court, when the inspection
3. Authentication by contents - since the of the record is essential to the just
witness knows the contents of the determination of the case.
documents, because no other person
knows it
4. Style of writing PUBLIC RECORD OF PRIVATE DOCUMENT
5. Authentication- by nature of reply letter - entry of record
PROOF OF CHAIN OF CUSTODY • How is it Proved:
(Authentication) - accounting from the time of 1. Certified copy of the page which contain
existence of the writing up to the time it is the recording
shown before the court; tracing how it came 3. Ask for the presentation of the original
to the court, who is in possession thereof, and record. How? Ask the court to issue a
the condition of the object is the same from subpoena duces tecum to the public officer
the time it is found to the time it is presented having custody thereof
in court; i.e. it is not altered. E.g. bullet is • Probative Value of Public Record - it is a
extracted from the body of the victim- Who proof of the existence of a private
extracted it? Where was it extracted? Where document in public record, but not a proof of
was it placed after it was extracted? Where is the validity of the private document.
it now? If the chain is broken, the authenticity HOW JUDICIAL RECORD IS IMPEACHED:
of the document is lost. • By evidence of:
1. Want of jurisdiction of the court or judicial
INSTANCES WHEN THE PRIVATE
officer
DOCUMENTS NEED NOT VS.
2. Collusion between the parties - e.g. legal
AUTHENTICATED:
separation: Parities agreed to separate
1. When the document is ancient - In 3. Fraud in the party offering the record, in
existence for 30 years or more. To be respect to the proceedings.
Spanish(now Filipino), if there is an appeal,

• It must be extrinsic and collateral to the that exhibit should be translated into Spanish
matter tried and not a matter which was (no tilipino) by the official interpreter of the
actually or potentially in issue in the action. court, or a translation should be agreed upon
(extrinsic fraud: means whereby the by the parties, and both original and
judgment was procured- translation send to the court.
HOW IS LACK OF RECORD BE PROVED:
3. Dionisio vs. Dionisio 45 P 699
The certificate of the custodian that he has
• The refusal of the court a quo to allow
diligently searched for a document or an entry
counsel for appellant time to present an
of a specified tenor and has been unable to
English translation of exhibit 1 (affidavit) is
find it.; ought to be usually a satisfactory
not reversible error Section 33,ruleI32
evidence of its non-existence.
expressly requires that documents written in
ALTERATIONS IN DOCUMENT an unofficial language, other than the national
• Alteration: It is a change in the instrument language be accompanied with translation in
by a party thereto or one entitled there under English and Spanish prepared before the trial,
or one in privity with such a person after the and it lies within the discretion of the trial
instrument has been signed or fully executed. court to allow or not to allow the attorneys
without consent of the other party to it by time to present such a translation without
an erasure, interlineation, addition or interrupting/delaying the proceedings.
substitution of material affecting the identity
of the instrument or contract. rights and OFFER OF EVIDENCE
obligations of parties. It imports some fraud or RULE:
improper design on the part of the person Any evidence, which a party desires to submit
entitled there under to change the effect of for the consideration of the court, must be
the instrument. formally offered because it is the duty of the
• How may alteration in a writing be judge to rest his findings of facts and his
explained? judgment only and strictly upon the evidence
A party producing a genuine writing, which offered by the parties at the trial. The offer
appears to have been altered, must explain in maybe made in any form sufficient to show
the following manner: that the party is ready and willing to submit
a. He may show that another made the the evidence to the court.
alteration. The purpose for which the evidence is
b. He may show tat the alteration was made presented must be specified because it is the
with the consent of the parties affected by duty of a party to select the competent from
it; the incompetent in offering testimony and he
c. He may show that the alteration was cannot impose this duty upon the trial court.
properly or innocently made d. He may show
RULE: A party who has introduced evidence is
that the alteration did not change the
not entitled as a matter of right to withdraw it.
meaning/language of the instrument.
It is discretionary with the court to allow it or
not.
• A party presenting the writing should have
EXCEPTION: A party may withdraw it anytime
accounted for the alteration when he
before the court has passed on its
introduced the paper in evidence, and not
admissibility.
endeavor to explain the alterations
afterwards. WHEN TO MAKE AN OFFER:
1. Testimonial Evidence : at the time the
witness is called to testify
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN AN
2. Documentary and Object Evidence: after all
UNOFFICIAL LANGUAGE
the witnesses have given their testimonies
GEN. RULE: on the witness stand.
Documents written in an unofficial language
REMEDIES
are admissible in evidence when
accompanied with a translation into English or 1. OBJECTION - procedure whereby a lawyer
Filipino, informs the court that evidence offered should
EXCEPTIONS: not be presented because it violates the Rules
1. People vs. Gaco 37 Off Gaz. 1684 of Procedure . e.g. "We object to Exhibit A
• No objection regarding its adrnissibility is because it is hearsay, self-serving, a
raised by the party against whom it is forgery ,etc.
offered.it must be presumed that the
language in which the document is written is Objection to What?
understood by all, and the document is a. the witness
admissible in evidence. b. the testimony of the witness
2. Ahgavs.Cabilingl8P415 c. the question - invoke the grounds
• When there is presented in evidence an enumerated in the rules of Evidence
exhibit written in any language other than
d. the admission of a documentary evidence: counsel for the adverse party shall manifest
to exhibit or to the purpose before the court that he is interposing a
continuing objection.
Kinds of Objection: • It therefore means that even if the adverse
a. Object to the formal offer of the party's lawyer does not say "objection', the
documentary evidence - by making objection questions of the other counsel are deemed
or objected to.
comment on each and every evidence
presented or on the purpose of the evidence. EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE
The comment may either be an OBJECTION
or an ADMISSION or plain SILENCE a. subsequent evidence is not of the same
(NO OBJECTION) b. Object to the testimony kind. Thus, in an action to probate a will
of the witness, -- by objecting to the question destroyed by the testatrix allegedly of unsound
or to the Answer mind, based on facts dissimilar from
of the witness; i.e. How it is phrased, those supporting other witness' opinions, could
the substance thereof, etc. Basis: not excuse failure to objection other
• Violation of the Rules of Evidence witnesses.
• Violation of Substantive Law b, When the question has not been answered.
When? When they are once objected to
HOW TO OBJECT ON A WINESS TESTIMONY? and not answered are later repeated and
A. State the ground for the objection. It must answered without objection, the objection is
be specific, unless: it is apparent, that there is waived.
a ground for the object! on. e.g. c. Where in competency of evidence is shown
"Question/answer is irrelevant". If ground is later. Where evidence is apparently
not stated, the objection is deemed waived. competent when it is admitted over
Failure to object merely affects the objection but its in competency is made
admissibility of the matter objected to, NOT apparent
the weight thereof. B. Objection must be by testimony which follows, the objection
made clearly with utmost courtesy. C. "Try to must be repeated, followed by a motion to
avoid incessant objections, i.e, mobjections strike out, or it is waived.
which have no limits, causing irritation. d. Where objection to evidence was sustained
GROUNDS FOR OBJECTING: but reoffered at a later stage of trial. e- Where
a. question is irrelevant evidence admitted on condition and the
b. question is vague condition is not fulfilled. E.g. the
c. question has already been answered condition that its competency or relevancy
d. multiple question will be shown by further evidence and the
e. witness is incompetent condition is not fulfilled, the
f. witness is not qualified objection must be repeated. f.
g. question has no basis Where the court reserves the
h. question requires an answer which is ruling on the objection.
privileged
i. question is leading RULING OF OBJECTIONS
j. question calls for hearsay evidence The court need not state the reason for
k. witness is asked to testify on what is sustaining or overruling an objection.
already alleged in the pleadings However, if the objection is based on two or
1. question is self-incriminatory more grounds, a ruling sustaining the
m. when the proper foundation has not been objection on one or some of them must
laid specify the ground/s relied upon.
n. when opposed is impeaching his own IS ERRONEOUS RULING AS TO THE QUESTION
witness OF ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE OR ITS
o. question calls for opinion of the witness REJECTION A GROUND FOR NEW TRIAL?
• An objection to evidence must not be raised NO, if it shall appear to the court before
for the first time on appeal which such objection is raised that,
• Even if the questions were asked by the independently of the evidence objected to
judge, the party has a right to object to and admitted, there was sufficient evidence to
evidence which he considers not admissible. justify the decision, or that if the rejected
The tria! judge may object to a question evidence had been received, it would not
propounded to a witness on cross- have varied the decision. If the result is
examination since he may on his own otherwise, a new trial shall be granted.
motion deal with offered evidence, however,
this is not ordinarily to be commended. POSSIBLE RULINGS ON THE OFFER:
1. The exhibits are admitted
• CONTINUING OBJECTION - may be
2. The exhibits are denied
imposed by the counsel for the adverse
3. The exhibits are admitted, but not tile
party if the other party keeps on asking
purpose
incompetent questions or when the answers
elicited are hearsay, etc.How done? The
2. PROFFER OR OFFER OF PROOF - when point out which part of the evidence must
the objection is sustained, the proponent may be considered by the court.
present proof of the testimony of the witness 2. TAKE AN EXCEPTION TO THE RULING OF
and or relevancy or importance of the THE COURT - counsel objected but the
question and answer court overruled the same. He therefore
• How? Request that the document be manifests that the Court's ruling is
attached to the records of the case erroneous. Warn the court that if he loses
• Why? Because if case is appealed, the the case, he shall appeal and point out the
appellate court shall have a basis in error in the appellate court.
determining whether or not the lower court
committed an error in rejecting the document RULE 133
and in order for the court to find the WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE
evidentiary value of the document-
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE:
What happens if the evidence of plaintiff and
4. MOTION TO STRIKE - a motion addressed
defendant are equal or in equipoise?
to the statement of the witness, so that the
• The case will be decided in favor of the
same will deleted or erased from the record.
defendant
• Two Instances:
a. When the Question is objectionable and Factors to be Considered by the Judge in
the witness answered. Here lawyer was determining Preponderance of Evidence:
not given the chance to object because
the witness answered immediately after 1. Facts and circumstances of the case - court
the question was asked. studies all angles
b. b.When the Question is proper but the 2. Intelligence of the witness - not IQ but the
answer is irrelevant or improper or ability of the witness to answer into
immaterial straightforward manner. Did he correctly see
• Effect: the incident in question? Can he convince
As If there is no answer the Court that he is narrating the truth on
what he saw, observed and heard?
When is it Necessary? 3. Manner in which the witness testifies - in
-as soon as the grounds therefore order to determine whether or not the
becomes apparent-Why is the Motion to Strike witness is telling the truth, the behavior of a
Out Necessary? person when testifying, to determine
-in order to preserve the right of the whether he is lying or telling the truth- E.g.
objecting party to a review of the ruling of the perspiring, fidgeting. tensed
trial court on appeal. 4. Nature of the facts on to which the witness
testifies
5. TENDER OF EXCLUDED EVIDENCE 5. Personal Credibility of the Witness - refers
Where the court refuses to permit the counsel to the reputation of a witness
to present testimony which he thinks is 6. Means and opportunity of knowing what the
competent, material and necessary to prove witness is testifying on - manner of
his case, the method of properly preserving observation; i,e, if he was only a few feet
the record to the end that the question may from the crime scene
be saved for purposes or review is through 7. Probability or Improbability of their
the making of an offer of proof. testimony - through human experience, the
• Two Fold Purpose: court can determine whether or not the
a. to inform the court what is expected to be witness is exaggerating his testimony. The
proved b. procuring exceptions to the testimony must not only come from a
exclusion of the offerred evidence so that credible witness. but the testimony must be
the upper credible in itself. Is the story in accordance
court may determine from the record with human experience.
whether the proposed evidence is competent. 8. Number of witnesses. It is the substance of
How? The counsel shall manifest before the the testimony of a witness that should be
court that "Had the witness been allowed to considered not their number or quantity.
testify, he should have answered..." Then ask. EXCEPT in cases of:
the court that the answer be recorded. a. conflicting testimonies - here number of
witnesses is to be considered b./n case of
treason - two witnesses must testify to the
THE FOLLOWING REMEDIES ARE TO BE same overt act in open court
AVAILED OF WHEN THE OBJECTION IS 9. Interest or Want of Interest of Witness in
OVERRULED AND THE OPPONENT the case - refers to the witness' bias,
BELIEVES THAT THE COURT'S RULING IS prejudice or motive because the person for
ERRONEOUS: whom he is testifying is his friend, etc.
1. MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - if this • Relationship per se does not affect the
motion is denied, the remedy is to make credibility of a witness. Proof of existence of
the offer of record.m Counsel here, must bias and prejudice must be present.
PRINCIPLES TO BE CONSIDERED BY A demeanor of the witnesses. Except: The

JUDGE IN DETERMINING appellate court may review the findings of
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE: fact by the Trial Court when the latter has
1. "Falsus in Uno,Falsus in Omnibus" - overlooked certain facts of substance or value
or significance which may affect or may
False in one, false in all. Hence, when change th e outcome of the case.
paret of the testimony of a witness is BINDING EFFECT OF FINDINGS OF FACT

BY THE COURT OF APPEALS -
untrue, all or the whole of his testimony They are binding and final in
the Supreme Court.
shall not be believed. Exceptions:
1. when the finding of the CA is grounded
primarily on speculation or if tey are not
2. Alibi - defense that a person is innocent of supported by strong evidence.
the crime because at the time of its 2. When the inference of the Ca is manifested
commission, the accused is eelsewhere. by mistake
Basis. Person cannot be in the same place at 3. When the conclusion of the CA is based on
the same time. a misapprehension of facts
• When must the court disregard the 4. When the findings of facts are conflicting
defense of alibi: 5. When the findings are contrary to the
a. when there is positive identification of the admission of the witnesses
accused. b. When the place of the commission 6. When the findings of facts ware premised
of the crime is accessible to the place where on the supposed absence of evidence or
the when such are contradicted by evidence on
accused was found. c. When the accused record
alleges self-defense - it is incumbent on the 7. When the findings of facts are without
part of the accused to citation of evidence.
prove by clear and convincing evidence
the existence ofself-defense-d. When the
accused makes a denial of fact of the PERPETUATION OF EVIDENCE - case when
commission of the crime. a witness would want to give his
PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT - testimony earlier, because he has to go
means moral certainty; not necessarily 100% abroad
free of error; not absolute certainty. Remedy: Offer the testimony of the witness
ahead and keep the same. When the action is
CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE filed, present the document before the court.
Sufficient to Warrant Conviction if:
STEPS TAKEN IN PERPETUATING A WITNESS'
a. there is more than one circumstance TESTIMONY
b. the facts from which the inferences are
derived are proved 1.-File a Petition in court, stating the witness’
c. a combination of all circumstances is suchj inability to testify
as to produce a conviction beyond reasonable 2.Court will set a date to take the witness
doubt. EXCEPT: Homicide Case testimony. This is similar to a direct
1. accused was seen running away from the examination.
scene of the crime with a bolo. How to take the testimony?
2. Two days before the killing, accused was -through a deposition under oath and with
heard to take revenge against the victim notice to the adverse party.
3. After the killing, the accused went into
hiding.
4. CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IS APPLICABLE
WHEN THERE IS NO DIRECT EVIDENCE TO
THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIME.
PROOF OF MOTIVE IS MATERIAL EXCEPT
WHEN:
THERE IS POSITIVE IDENTIFICATION OF
THE ACCUSED.
BINDING EFFECT OF THE FINDINGS OF

FACT BY THE TRIAL COURT: It is entitled to
great respect. It should not be disturbed on
appeal, because it is the trial court which had
the opportunity to observe the behaviour and

Evidence 2003

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Evidence 2003

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

 REMEDIAL LAW REVIEWER 

1 SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY BAR OPERATIONS

contents of a document other than the

Rule 130 2. Secondary Evidence

Q: X sold his house and lot with right

` PRIMA FACIE CASE ‘ DEFINED:

A prima facie case is one which is

WHO HAS THE BURDEN OF PROOF?

In civil cases, the burden of proof rests

WHAT MATTERS NEED BE PROVED? People vs Mesal

MUST A NEGATIVE ALLEGATION BE People vs Mendi

Generally, a negative allegation need Appellant must be acquitted for failure

There being no proof that accused- PRESUMPTION DEFINED:

ISSUE: Accused-appellant maintains CLASSES OF PRESUMPTION JURIS:

1. Equitable estoppel or estoppel in Discussions on some of the disputable

The Rule is that the tenant is not

Sec. 3 Rule 131 ( a – kk ) enumerates the

When cross-examination cannot be

1) adverse party; What is a Misleading question?

put to him concerning them; is the testimony of evidence is the

 For the purpose of their presentation in

tradition existing in a family previous published for use by persons engaged

iii. the good or bad moral

the first time on appeal, yet if the

MULTIPLE HEARSAY/HEARSAY TWICE

i.e. where statement is a circumstantial

contradict the dying constitute the ges restae of the subject of

-Admissible in evidence if the declarant

evidence would open the 3. ACT OR DECLARATION ABOUT

PEDIGREE - is the history of family

whose pedigree is to be formed and person.

5. COMMON REPUTATION 3. The reputation must

1. That it is the reputation inducing emotional

4. The presence or absence of

numerous persons cooperating i.e. Keeping of police

***CONDITIONS BEFORE AN a)he has seen the person write

STEPS: ***The opinion on a person’s

prosecution’s evidence, it is determined by by nature or habit, which distinguishes him

2. Presumption juris or law - are EXCEPTIONS:

Presumption of law are usually CHARACTER MUST BE RELEVANT:

2.) UNLESS in REBUTTAL, the In summary,

The character or reputation of a be registered to be valid,the public document

How Can Official Record Can Be Proven? PRIVATE DOCUMENTS- documents

PUBLIC PRIVATE reckoned from execution to the date it is

Spanish(now Filipino), if there is an appeal,

PRINCIPLES TO BE CONSIDERED BY A demeanor of the witnesses. Except: The

paret of the testimony of a witness is BINDING EFFECT OF FINDINGS OF FACT

BINDING EFFECT OF THE FINDINGS OF

You might also like