PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee,

Vs.
JOEL YATAR alias "KAWIT", appellant.
G.R. No. 150224 May 19, 2004
FACTS:
On June 30, 1998, Kathylyn Uba stayed in her grandmothers (Isabel
Dawangs) house,despite her intention to go forth Tuguegarao City, as her
other formers housemate-relatives left in the morning. At 10:00 am,
accused-appellant Joel Yatar was seen at the back of the same house where
Kathylyn stayed during said date. At 12:30 pm, Judilyn, Kathylyns first
cousin saw Yatar, who was then wearing a white shirt with collar and black
pants, descended from the second floor and was pacing back and forth at the
back of Isabel Dawangs house, Judilyn didnt find this unusual since Yatar
and his wife used to live therein. At 1:30 PM, Yatar called upon Judilyn,
telling the latter that he would not be getting the lumber he had been
gathering. This time, Judilyn noticed that Yatar is now wearing a black shirt
(without collar) and blue pants; and noticed that the latters eyes were
reddish and sharp. Accused-appellant asked about the whereabouts of
Judilyns husband, as the former purports to talk with the latter. Then, Yatar
immediately left when Judilyns husband arrived. In the evening, when
Isabel Dawang arrived home, she found the lights of her house turned off,
the door of the ground floor opened, and the containers, which she asked
Kathylyn to fill up, were still empty. Upon ascending the second floor to
check whether the teenage girl is upstairs, Isabel found that the door therein
was tied with rope. When Isabel succeeded opening the tied door with a
knife, and as she groped in the darkness of the second level of her house, she
felt Kathylyns lifeless and naked body, with some intestines protruding out
from it. Soon after, police came to the scene of the crime to provide
assistance. Therein, they found Kathylyns clothes and undergarments beside
her body. Amongst others, a white collared shirt splattered with blood was
also found 50-meters away from Isabels house.Meanwhile, semen has
also been found upon examination of Kathylyns cadaver. When
subjected under DNA testing, results showed that the DNA comprising the
sperm specimen is identical to Yatars genotype. Yatar was accused of the
special complex crime of Rape with Homicide and was convicted for
the
same
by
the
Regional
Trial
Court
of
Tabuk,
Kalinga.Thereafter, he made an appeal to the Honorable Supreme Court in
order to assail the court a quos decision. On appeal, Yatar avers that: (1) the
trial court erred in giving much weight to the evidence DNA testing or
analysis done on him, in lieu of the seminal fluid found inside the victims
(cadaver) vaginal canal; (2) the blood sample taken from is violate of his
constitutional right against self-incrimination; and the conduct of DNA
testing is also in violation on prohibition against ex-post facto laws.

ISSUE:
Whether or not the result of the DNA testing done on the sperm
specimen may be used as evidence for Yatars conviction?

RULING:
The Supreme Court in this case ruled based on the US case of Daubert
vs. Merrell Dowas a precedent. In the said US jurisprudence, it was ruled
that pertinent evidence based on scientifically valid principles could be used,
so long as the same is RELEVANT and RELIABLE.Hence, it was called
then as the DAUBERT TEST.RULE: At present, SECTION 7, RULES ON
DNA EVIDENCE may be used as the legal basis.Sec. 7 of the Rules on
DNA evidence, which took effect on 2007, provides for the factors to be
considered in assessing the probative weight or value to be given on
evidence derived or generated from DNA testing. Such factors are, to wit:
(a)The chain of custody, including how the biological samples were
collected, how they were handled, and the possibility of contamination of
the samples; (b) The DNA testing methodology, including the procedure
followed in analyzing the samples,the advantages and disadvantages of the
procedure, and compliance with the scientifically valid standards in
conducting the tests;
(c) The forensic DNA laboratory, including
accreditation by any reputable standards-setting institution and the
qualification of the analyst who conducted the tests. If the laboratory is not
accredited, the relevant experience of the laboratory in forensic casework
and credibility shall be properly established; and (d) The reliability of the
testing result, as hereinafter provided.APPLICATION DAUBERT TEST:
The Honorable Supreme Court in this case upheld the probative
value of the DNA test result yielded from the analysis of Yatars blood
sample from that of the semen specimen obtained from the cadavers vaginal
canal. Accordingly, it held that the DNA evidence is both reliable and
relevant.