Where several extrajudicial confessions had been made by several persons charged

1. Define Evidence with the same offense and without the possibility of collusion among them, the fact
a. Evidence is the means, sanctioned by these rules, to ascertain, in a that the statements are in all respects identical is confirmatory of the confessions of
judicial proceeding, the truth respecting a matter of fact. the co-defendants and are admissible against the persons implicated
therein...interlocking confessions are exceptions to the hearsay rule and to the res
2. Enumerate the requisites of admissibility of evidence ibter alios acta rule. (Handbook on Evidence, Agpalo (2003), p. 168.)
a. The evidence is relevant
b. The evidence is not excluded by the rules 8. Kinds of cases where judicial pleadings are not allowed. (judgment on the
pleadings?)
3. Define Factum Probandum
a. The fact or proposition to be established or fact to be proved Answer:

4. Enumerate the exception to the hearsay rule (p 361 Riano.2009) a) Annulment cases
a. Dying declaration b) Legal Separation cases
b. Act or declaration against interest
c. Act or declaration against pedigree
d. Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree
9. Define QUALIFYING THE WITNESS.
e. Common reputation
f. Part of the res gestae
Answer:
g. Entries in the course of business
h. Entries in official records
While there is no exact standard fixing the qualifications of an expert witness, such a
i. Commercial lists and the like
witness will be deemed qualified if, and only if, he possesses special skill or
j. Learned treaties
knowledge respecting the matter involved so superior to that of men in general as to
k. Testimony or depositions at a former trial.
make his formation of a judgment a fact of probative value. It is not necessary that he
should be infallible or possess the highest degree of skill or knowledge.
5. What is
a. clear and convincing evidence
Generally, any person who by study or experience has acquired particular knowledge
i. if it produces in the mind of the trier of fact a FIRM BELIEF or
or experience may be allowed to give in evidence his opinion upon matters of
CONVICTION as to the allegations sought be established. This is
technical knowledge relating to such business or employment. (Francisco, p.351)
more than preponderance of evidence.
b. Preponderance of evidence
It must be shown that the witness is really an expert; determination of his
i. Superior weight of evidence
competency is a preliminary. An expert witness must have made the subject upon
c. proof of guild beyond reasonable doubt
which he gives his opinion on a matter of a particular study, practice or observation,
i. moral certainty is required or that degree of proof which
and he must have a particular and special knowledge on the subject.
produces convictions in an unprejudiced mind.
10. Define NEGATIVE PREGNANT.
6. Define CONCOMITANT CIRCUMSTANCES.
Answer:
Answer:
It is a form of denial which at the same time involves an affirmative implication
Those accompanying the fact in issue and pointing to it, such as: favorable to the opposing party.
a) Alibi- weakest defense; the accused must show not only that he was
somewhere else when the crime was committed but likewise demonstrate A denial implying its affirmative opposite by seeming to deny only a qualification of
that it was physically impossible for him to have been at the scene of the the allegation and not the allegation itself. (Black's Law Dictionary, 8th ed., p. 1061)
crime at the time of its commission.
b) Opportunity- if the accused was the only one who has the opportunity to do A negative statement which contains an affirmative implication. (Sibal, Philippine
the act charged, such circumstance may be taken against him. Exclusive Legal Dictionary,(1986), p. 604)
opportunity, however, is not essential. It is enough that the person charged
had an opportunity to do the act.
c) Incompatibility- when the concomitant circumstances are incompatible with 11. RIGHTS PROVIDED UNDER THE CONSTITUTION THAT EXCLUDES
the doing of an act by a person, they may be proved to show that such EVIDENCE:
person is not the author of the act.

7. Define the DOCTRINE OF INTERLOCKING CONFESSIONS.

Section 2. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses,
Answer: papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature
and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of arrest
shall issue except upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge
after examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he
may produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or
things to be seized.
Section 3.
(1) The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except upon
lawful order of the court, or when public safety or order requires otherwise, as
prescribed by law.
(2) Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding section shall
be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding.
Section 12.
(1) Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall
have the right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to have
competent and independent counsel preferably of his own choice. If the
person cannot afford the services of counsel, he must be provided with
one. These rights cannot be waived except in writing and in the
presence of counsel.
(2) No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any other means
which vitiate the free will shall be used against him. Secret detention places, solitary,
incommunicado, or other similar forms of detention are prohibited.
(3) Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this or Section 17
hereof shall be inadmissible in evidence against him.xxx
Section 17. No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
12. GENUINENESS AND DUE EXECUTION OF A DOCUMENT
It means nothing more than that the instrument is not spurious, counterfeit,
or of different import on its face from the one executed.
13. ORDER in the EXAMINATION OF AN INDIVIDUAL WITNESS:
Direct Examination by the Proponent;
Cross-examination by the Opponent;
Re-direct examination by the Proponent;
Re-cross-examination by the Opponent (Rule 132, sec. 4).
14. EXAMPLES OF A PUBLIC DOCUMENT
Notarized Documents: Deed of Sale of a Parcel of Land, Deed of Sale of a
Condo Unit;
Baptismal Certificate;
Death Certificate;
Marriage Certificate.
15. Requisites for the admissibility of (secondary) evidence when the
original is in the custody of the adverse party. [P. 79, Q2, Francisco]
A: In order that the contents of the original document in the possession of the
adverse party may be proved by secondary evidence, the following facts must be
shown by the party offering the secondary evidence:
a. The adverse partys custody or control of the original document;
b. That reasonable notice was given to the adverse party who has the custody
or control of the document;
c. Satisfactory proof of its existence;
d. Failure or refusal by the adverse party to produce it in court.
16. Admission vs Declaration against Interest. [P. 274, Q2, Francisco]
A: A declaration of a deceased person against his interest must be
distinguished from admission, in that (a) the admission is not necessarily against the
interest of the person who made the admission, while the present exception refers
must be declaration against interest; (b) an admission may be used although the
admitter is still alive while the present exception refers to a declaration against
interest of a deceased person; and (c) an admission may be used only against the
admitter and those identified with him in legal interest while a declaration against
interest is admissible against third persons.
Thus, it has been held that the declaration of a deceased person the he
owed a debt to a third person is admissible, though such declarant is a stranger to
the suit. Men do not falsely admit debts against themselves; and it is this
presumption which induces the law to admit such a declaration.
17. Name 5 disputable presumptions. [For a complete list, refer to Rule 131,
Section 3]
A: Sec. 3 . Disputable presumptions. The following presumptions are
satisfactory if uncontradicted, but may be contradicted and overcome by
other evidence:
(a)That a person is innocent of crime or wrong;
(b)That an unlawful act was done with an unlawful intent;
(c)That a person intends the ordinary consequences of his voluntary act;
(d)That a person takes ordinary care of his concerns;
(e)That evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if produced;
18. Define Ultimate Facts.
A: Ultimate Facts - the principal, determinate, and constitutive facts upon the
existence of which the plaintiffs cause of action rests. It does not refer to the details
of probative matter or particulars of evidence by which these material elements are public official who shall be required to sign the copies of the inventory and be given a
to be established. [UP Law (Remedial Law) Reviewer] copy thereof; Provided, that the physical inventory and photograph shall be
conducted at the place where the search warrant is served; or at the nearest police
station or at the nearest office of the apprehending officer/team, whichever is
practicable, in case of warrantless seizures; Provided, further, that non-compliance
19.
with these requirements under justifiable grounds, as long as the integrity and
evidentiary value of the seized items are properly preserved by the apprehending
20. Define the Doctrine of Adoptive Admission
officer/team, shall not render void and invalid such seizures of and custody over said
It is, however, argued that the Angara Diary is not the diary of the petitioner
items x x x. (Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA 9165 on the handling and
(Estrada), hence, non-binding on him. The argument overlooks the doctrine
disposition of seized dangerous drugs)
of adoptive admission. An adoptive admission is a partys reaction to a
Jurisprudence:
statement or action by another person when it is reasonable to treat the
The Court elaborated in this wise:
partys reaction as an admission of something stated or implied by the
Jurisprudence tells us that the failure to immediately mark seized drugs will not
other person. Jones explains that the basis for admissibility of admissions made
automatically impair the integrity of chain of custody.
vicariously is that arising from the ratification or adoption by the party of the
The failure to strictly comply with Sec. 21(1), Art. II of RA 9165 does not necessarily
statements which the other person had made. To use the blunt language of Mueller
render an accuseds arrest illegal or the items seized or confiscated from him
and Kirkpatrick, this process of attribution is not mumbo jumbo but common sense.
inadmissible. What is of utmost importance is the preservation of the integrity and
In the Angara Diary, the options of the petitioner started to dwindle when the armed
the evidentiary value of the seized items, as these would be utilized in the
forces withdrew its support from him as President and commander-in-chief. Thus,
determination of the guilt or innocence of the accused.
Executive Secretary Angara had to ask Senate President Pimentel to advise petitioner
As we held in People v. Cortez, testimony about a perfect chain is not always the
to consider the option of dignified exit or resignation. Petitioner did not object to
standard because it is almost always impossible to obtain an unbroken chain.
the suggested option but simply said he could never leave the country. Petitioners
Accused-appellant broaches the view that SA Isidoros failure to mark the confiscated
silence on this and other related suggestions can be taken as an admission by him.
shabu immediately after seizure creates a reasonable doubt as to the drugs identity.
(Estrada v. Desierto, G.R. Nos. 146710-15, April 3, 2001)
People v. Sanchez, however, explains that RA 9165 does not specify a time frame for
immediate marking, or where said marking should be done:
What Section 21 of R.A. No. 9165 and its implementing rule do not expressly specify
is the matter of marking of the seized items in warrantless seizures to ensure that
the evidence seized upon apprehension is the same evidence subjected to inventory
21. Exceptions To the Rule that an Evidence Can Be Waived
and photography when these activities are undertaken at the police station rather
If the rule of evidence waived by the parties has been established by law on
than at the place of arrest. Consistency with the chain of custody rule requires that
grounds of public policy, the waiver is void. Accordingly, the waiver of the privilege
the marking of the seized items to truly ensure that they are the same items that
against the disclosure of state secrets is void. (Francisco, page 9, question 6)
enter the chain and are eventually the ones offered in evidence should be done (1)
in the presence of the apprehended violator (2) immediately upon confiscation.
22. Exceptions That Evidence is Not Necessary to be Presented in a Factual
To be able to create a first link in the chain of custody, then, what is required is that
Issue
the marking be made in the presence of the accused and upon immediate
a. Evidence may be dispensed with by agreement of the parties.
confiscation. Immediate confiscation has no exact definition. Thus, in People v.
b. Evidence is not also required on matters of judicial notice and on matters judicially
Gum-Oyen, testimony that included the marking of the seized items at the police
admitted.
station and in the presence of the accused was sufficient in showing compliance with
If the question is general, i.e., When is Evidence Not Required, the
the rules on chain of custody. Marking upon immediate confiscation contemplates
following answers are included:
even marking at the nearest police station or office of the apprehending team.
c. Where no factual issue exists such as when the case only presents questions of law
d. When the pleadings in a civil case do not tender an issue of fact
#24 (3 kinds of secondary evidences)
(Riano, 2009 edition, page 3)
Answer: Rule 130 Sections 5,6 & 7 ( those in bold letters suffice )
#23 CHAIN OF CUSTODY RULE
Answer: Section 21 or RA 9165 ( can also be found in Riano p149 ) Section 5. When original document is unavailable. When the original
SECTION 21. Custody and Disposition of Confiscated, Seized and/or Surrendered document has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, the offeror,
Dangerous Drugs, Plant Sources of Dangerous Drugs, Controlled Precursors and upon proof of its execution or existence and the cause of its unavailability without
Essential Chemicals, Instruments/Paraphernalia and/or Laboratory Equipment. The bad faith on his part, may prove its contents by a copy, or by a recital of its contents
PDEA shall take charge and have custody of all dangerous drugs, plant sources of in some authentic document, or by the testimony of witnesses in the order stated.
dangerous drugs, controlled precursors and essential chemicals, as well as (4a)
instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory equipment so confiscated, seized and/or
surrendered, for proper disposition in the following manner:
Section 6. When original document is in adverse party's custody or control.
(a) The apprehending officer/team having initial custody and control of the drugs
If the document is in the custody or under the control of adverse party, he must
shall, immediately after seizure and confiscation, physically inventory and
have reasonable notice to produce it. If after such notice and after satisfactory proof
photograph the same in the presence of the accused or the person/s from whom such
of its existence, he fails to produce the document, secondary evidence may be
items were confiscated and/or seized, or his/her representative or counsel, a
presented as in the case of its loss. (5a)
representative from the media and the Department of Justice (DOJ), and any elected
Section 7. Evidence admissible when original document is a public record.
When the original of document is in the custody of public officer or is recorded in a
public office, its contents may be proved by a certified copy issued by the public
officer in custody thereof. (2a)
#25 Exceptions to the Parole Evidence Rule
Answer: Rule 130 Sec 9 ( exceptions are those in bold letter )
Section 9. Evidence of written agreements. When the terms of an agreement
have been reduced to writing, it is considered as containing all the terms agreed upon
and there can be, between the parties and their successors in interest, no evidence of
such terms other than the contents of the written agreement.
However, a party may present evidence to modify, explain or add to the terms of
written agreement if he puts in issue in his pleading:
(a) An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the written
agreement;
(b) The failure of the written agreement to express the true intent and
agreement of the parties thereto;
(c) The validity of the written agreement; or
(d) The existence of other terms agreed to by the parties or their
successors in interest after the execution of the written agreement.
#26 When a client is not bound by the actions of his counsel
Answer:
As a rule, the negligence of the counsel is considered as the negligence of the client.
However, in several cases the Supreme Court admitted exceptions to the general
rule, to wit;
1. the client is deprived of due process
2. Application of the general rule will result in outright deprivation of clients liberty
or property
3. Where the interest of justice so requires, and accord relief to the client who
suffered by reason of the lawyers gross negligence.
4. When the negligence of counsel is so gross, reckless and inexcusable that the
client is deprived of his day in court.
*It must be noted that the exceptions were applied on a case to case basis,
depending on the factual circumstances which surrounded the respective clients
milieu.
*Example of cases where exceptions were applied:
G.R. No. 133750 November 29, 1999
G.R. No. 153414 June 27, 2006
G.R. No. 94457 March 18, 1991
27: requisites for the rule in marital disqualification
1. Spouses are legally married
2. either spouse must be a party to the case (Page 129, Francisco (1996))
28: requisites for common reputation
1.thae facts must be of public or general interest and more than 30 yrs old
2. The common reputation must have been ancient,i.e., 30 yrs or 1 generation old
3. The reputation must have been one formed among a class of persons who were in
a position to have some sources of information and to contibute intelligently to the
formation of the opinion
4. The common reputation must have been existing previous to the contoversy (Page
297, Francisco (1996))
29: enumerate and define the 3 kinds of collateral matters
1. Prospectant/antecedent - those preceeding the fact in issue but pointing forward to
it (e.g. moral character, motive, conspiracy)
2. Concomitant - those accompanying the fact in issue and pointing to it (e.g. alibi,
opportunity, incompatibility)
3. Retrospectant/subsequent - those succeeding the fact in issue but pointing
backward to it (e.g. flight, concealment, fingerprints, bloodstains) (Page 364, San
Beda Remedial Reviewer (2012))
30: what are the 2 rules governing res gestae
The general classes of declaration to which the terms res gestae is usually applied
are:
1. spontaneous statements
2. verbal acts (Page 305, Francisco (1996))
31: Define Curative Admissibility of Evidence
Answer: Where an inadmissible fact has been offered by one party and received
without objection, and the opponents afterwards, for the purpose of negativing or
examining or otherwise counteracting it, offer a fact similarly inadmissible, such fact
is admissible if it serves to remove an unfair effect upon the court which might
otherwise ensue from the original fact.
If the opponent made a timely objection at the time the inadmissible
evidence was offered, and his objection was erroneously overruled in the forst
instance, the claim to present similar inadmissible facts would be untenable since his
objection would save him, on appeal, from any harm which may accrue.
Thus, A sues B for the latter's alleged refusal to pay for merchandise
supplied by A. B denies having received the merchandise. In the course of the trial A
introduces evidence showing that B swindled C, a third person, on a similar
transaction before. This should not have been admitted. B now offers to explain that
he entered into a fair and honest transaction with C. In fairness to B, this should not
be admitted. (Fransisco, pg. 12.)
32: Define Falsa Demonstration Non Nocet
Answer: False designation; erroneous description of a person or thing in a written
instrument (Inst 2, 20, 30.) Falsa demonstratio non nocet, cam de corpore (persona)
constat. False descriptiondoes not injure or vitiate, provided the thing or person
intended has once been sufficiently described. Mere false description does not make
an instrument inoperative. (Broom, Max. 629; 6 Term, 670; 11 Mees. & W. 189;
Cleaveland v. Smith, 2 Story, 291,Fed. Cas. No. 2,874.)
33: Define Qui Tacet Consitere Videtur.
Answer: According to Sec. 32 of Rule 130, An act or declaration made in the presence
and within the hearing or observation of a party who does or says nothing when the
act or decaration is such as naturally to call for action or comment if not true, and
when proper and possible for him to do so, may be given in evidence against him.
34: What matters/facts are subject to discretionary of judicial notice?
Answer: A court may take judicial notice of the following.
 (a) Matters of public knowledge. - The matter of which a court will take
judicial notice must be a subject of common and general knowledge. In other words,
judicial knowledge of facts is measured by general knowledge of the same facts. A
fact is said to be generally recognized or known when its existence or operation is
accepted by the public without qualification or contention. The test is whether
sufficient notoriety attaches to the fact involved as to make it proper to assume its
existence without proof. Thus, the courts may take judicial notice of the existence and
location within the territory over which they exercise jurisdiction of great rivers and
lakes, and their relation to provincial borders; of the navigability of streams,
constituting highways of commerce and other notorious facts concerning the same.
The presumption of general knowledge weakens as we pass to smaller and less
known streams; and yet, within the limits of any country the navigability of a large
river ought to be generally known. The courts may, therefore take judicial knowledge
thereof, as a matter of general knowledge.
(b) Matters capable of unquestionable demonstration. - More realistically,
we have here an important extension of judicial notice to the new field of facts
capable of such instant and unquestionable demonstration, if desired, that no party
would think of imposing a falsity on the tribunal in the face of an intelligent
adversary or capable of immediate and accurate demonstration by resort to easily
accessible sources of indisptable accuracy, as variously stated. In this realm fall
most of the facts, theories, and conclusions which have come to be established and
accepted by the specialists in the areas of natural science, natural phenomena,
chronology, technology, geography, statistical facts and other fields of professional
and scientific knowledge.
(c) Matters ought to be known to judges because of their judicial functions. -
In a case appilcant introduced a certificate signed by the Consul General of Spain the
Philippines, stating that in accordance with articles 17 and 25 of the Spanish Civil
Code, among other Spanish legislation, Filipinos are eligible to Spanish citizenship in
Spain. Article 17 provides that foreigners who have obtained a cerificate of
naturalization and those who have not obtained such certificate but have acquired
domicile in any town of the Monarchy are Spaniards. It was held that as the Spanish
Civil Code has been and still is the basic code in force in the Philippines, articles 17
thereof may be regarded as matters known to judges of the Philippines by reason of
their judicial functions and may be judicially recognized by them without the
introduction of proof. (Fransisco, pg. 26)
35: Theory of Hearsay Rule
Answer: Evidence is called hearsay when its probative force depends in whole or in
part, on the competency and credibility of some persons other than the witness by
whom it is sought to produce it.
Another definition is: the evidence not of what the witness knows
himself but of what he has heard from others.
The testimony of a witness regarding a statement made by another
person, if intended to etablish the truth of the facts asserted in the statement, is
clearly hearsay evidence. It is otherwise if the purpose of placing the statement in the
record is merely to establish the fact that the statement was made or the tenor of
such statement.
Hearsay evidence is inadmissible according to the general rule. The
real basis for the exclusion appears to lie in the fact that hearsay testimony is not
subject to the tests which can ordinarily be applied for the ascertainment of the
testimony, since the declarant is not present and available for cross-examination. The
exercise of the right to cross-examine the witness of the adverse party is regarded as,
and is in fact, essential in the administration of justice to discover the falsity of
testimony and prevent the admission of perjured testimony. This right is not available
in respect of hearsay since the declarant is not in court. In criminal cases, the
admission of hearsay evidence would be a violation of the constitutional provision
that the accused shall enjoy the right of being confronted with the witnesses
testifying against and to cross-examine them. Moreover, the court is without
opportunity to test the credibility of hearsay statements by observing the demeanor
of the person who made them. (Fransisco, pg. 244-245.)
36: What is the difference between Admission and Declaration of Interest
1. An admission is admitted even if the person making the admission is
alive and is in court; whereas, to be admitted as a declaration against
interest, the declarant must be dead or unable to testify
2. An admission is made at any time, even during trial; while a declaration
against interest is made before the controversy arises
3. An admission is admissible as long as it is inconsistent with his present
claim or defense and need not be against ones pecuniary or moral
interest; whereas, a declaration against interest is made against ones
pecuniary or moral interest
4. An admission is admissible only against the party making the admission;
while a declaration against interest is admissible even against third
persons
5. An admission is not, and is admissible not as an exception to any rule;
whereas a declaration against interest is an exception to the hearsay
rule. [SOURCE: Riano (2009 ed) p. 116]
37: What is the Bursting Bubble Theory?
The Bursting Bubble Theory, also known as the Thayerian Theory, posits that
when opposing evidence comes into the case, the presumptionhaving
served its purposeis no longer operative and the issue is determined on
the evidence just as though no presumption had ever existed. The effect of
this rule is to continue the burden of persuasion on him who initially had the
benefit of the presumption. In other words, the presumption does not shift
the burden. [SOURCE: San Beda Reviewer]
Under the Bursting Bubble Theory, a presumption vanishes upon the
introduction of evidence which would support a finding of the nonexistence
of the presumed fact. [SOURCE:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_301]
38: What is the But-for Test?
More popularly known as the Doctrine of the Fruit of the Poisonous Tree, this
rule postulates that all evidence, which would not have come to light but for
the illegal action of the police, must be suppressed. [Source: San Beda
Reviewer]
39: Difference between Burden of Proof and Burden of Evidence
Burden of proof is the obligation of a party to present evidence on the facts
in issue necessary to establish his claim or defense by the amount of
evidence required by law (Sec. 1 Rule 130). Burden of evidence is the duty of
a party to go forward with the evidence to overthrow any prima facie
presumption against him (Bautista v. Sarmiento). [SOURCE: Riano (2009
ed) p. 409]
40: What are the instances when the rule on survivors disqualification is
waived?
The Survivor Disqualification Rule (Sec. 23, Rule 130) may be waived by:
 1. Failing to object to the testimony information was necessary to enable him to act in capacity, and which would
2. Cross examining the witness on the prohibited testimony blacken the reputation of the patient;
3. Offering evidence to rebut the testimony [SOURCE: Riano (2009 d. A MINISTER OR PRIEST cannot, without the consent of the person making the
ed.) p. 264] confession, be examined as to any confession made to or any advice given
by him in his professional character in the course of discipline enjoined by
the church to which the minister or priest belongs;
41. PERSONS THAT MAY NOT BE A WITNESS AS TO MATTERS LEARNED IN e. A PUBLIC OFFICER cannot be examined during his term of office or
CONFIDENCE afterwards, as to communications made to him in official confidence, when
ANSWER: Section 24, Rule 130 the court finds that the public interest would suffer by the disclosure.
a. THE HUSBAND OR THE WIFE, during or after the marriage, cannot be
examined without the consent of the other as to any communication 42. REQUISITES FOR A PHOTOGRAPH TO BE ADMISSIBLE AS OBJECT
received in confidence by one from the other during the marriage except in a EVIDENCE.
civil case by one against the other, or in a criminal case committed by one ANSWER: Chapter 4 Object and Documentary Evidence; A. Object Evidence;
against the other or the latters direct descendants or ascendants; Demonstrative Evidence; no. 3 Photographs
b. An ATTORNEY cannot, without the consent of his client, be examined as to Photographs of persons, thing and place when instructive to the understanding of the
any communication made by the client to him, or his advice given thereon in case, will be admitted in evidence. For a still photograph to be admitted, the same
must be RELEVANT AND COMPETENT. It is competent when it is properly
the course of, or with a view to, professional employment, nor can an
authenticated by a witness who is familiar with the scene or person portrayed, and
attorneys SECRETARY, STENOGRAPHER, OR CLERK be examined, without who testifies that the photograph faithfully represents what it depicts.
the consent of the client and his employer, concerning any fact the Some courts insist on requiring the photographer to testify but this view has been
knowledge of which has been acquired in such capacity; eroded by the tendency of modern courts to admit as witness one who has familiarity
c. A PERSON AUTHORIZED TO PRACTICE MEDICINE, SURGERY OR OBSTETRICS with the scene portrayed (Sison v people, 250 scra 58)
cannot in a civil case, without the consent of the patient, be examined as to Under the Electronic Rules of evidence, photographic evidence of events, acts or
any advice or treatment given by him or any information which he may have transactions shall be admissible in evidence provided that:
acquired in attending such patient in a professional capacity, which (a) It shall be presented, displayed and shown to the court; and
(b) It shall be identified, explained or authenticated by either:
FACT IN ISSUE FACTS RELEVANT (TO THE a. The person who made the recording; or
ISSUE) b. Some other person competent to testify on the accuracy thereof
Those facts which a plaintiff must Those facts which render probable (Sec. 1, Rule 11, Electronic Rules of Evidence)
prove in order to establish his claim the existence or non-existence of a
and those facts which the fact in issue, or some other The admissibility of photographs is within the discretion of the trial court, and its
defendant must prove in order to relevant fact. ruling in this respect will not be interfered with, except upon a clear showing of an
establish a defense set up by him, abuse of discretion. In determining whether photographs should be admitted, a trial
but only when the fact alleged by Facts relevant to the issue are in judge must determine whether they are relevant, and whether a proper foundation
the one party is not admitted by the main determined by ordinary has been laid
the other party. logic and experience. 43. When is parol evidence admissible for the reformation of a written
instrument on the ground of mistake?
Facts which are admitted, expressly ANSWER:
or by implication are not in issue. To justify the reformation of a written instrument upon the ground of mistake, the
To determine the relevancy of the concurrence of three things is necessary:
evidence, the pleadings of the 1. mistake should be one of fact
parties must first be looked to for 2. mistake should be mutual or common to both parties to the instrument
the purpose of ascertaining the 3. mistake should be alleged and proved by clear and convincing evidence
issue.
For example, if A sues B for assault, For instance, in the example given, 44. What is a need not be proved principle?
A must prove the assault. If Bs to prove that the force used on A ANSWER: Judicial notice.
defense is that A was trespassing was no more than necessary to Judicial notice is based on the maxim,what is known need not be proved
on Bs land and B was ejecting him eject him, B might prove that A
with no more force than was was abusive, refused to leave 45. FACT IN ISSUE VS. FACTS RELEVANT
reasonably necessary, B must when asked and resisted violently
prove that A was trespassing and when B attempted to escort him off
that no unnecessary force was the property.
used to eject him. These facts, if proved, render it
more likely that the forced used on
If there are no admissions, the A was not more than necessary.
facts in issue are that B assaulted
A, that A was a trespasser and B
admits the assault, the sole fact at
issue is whether the force used was
reasonable in the circumstances.

46. DEFINE CONDITIONAL ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE
A. Kinds of Admissibility:
1. MULTIPLE where evidence is relevant and competent for 2 or more
purposes, such may be admissible if it satisfies all the requirements
prescribed by law for its admissibility for the purpose for which it is
presented, even if it does not satisfy the other requisites for its admissibility
for other purposes.
2. CONDITIONAL where evidence appears to be immaterial unless it is
connected with other facts to be subsequently proved, such may be received
on the condition that the facts be afterwards proved.
3. CURATIVE where improper evidence was admitted over the objection of the
opposing party, he should be permitted to contradict it with similar improper
evidence. Otherwise it would result in disparity of ruling to his prejudice
(Fighting fire with fire).
B. State the rule regarding conditional admissibility of evidence and illustrate your
answer:
Where two or more evidentiary facts are so connected under the issues that
the relevancy of one depends upon another not yet evidenced, and the party is
unable to introduce them both at the same moment, the offering counsel may be
required by the court, as a condition precedent (1) to state the supposed connecting
facts, and (2) to promise to evidence them later. If a promise thus made is not
fulfilled, the court may strike out the evidence thus conditionally admitted, if a motion
is made by the opposite party. Thus, evidence of facts and declarations may not
become material or admissible until shown to be those of an agent of the other party
and a copy of writing may not become competent evidence until the original is
proven to be lost or destroyed.
47. ARE TELEPHONE CONVERSATIONS ADMISSIBLE ON EVIDENCE?
Unless otherwise objectionable, a telephone conversation between a witness
and another person is admissible in any case in which a face to face conversation
between a witness and another person would be admissible on evidence, provided
that the identity of the person with whom the witness was speaking is satisfactorily
established, but not otherwise.
Proof of identity is most readily afforded by the witnesses recognition of the
voice of the person with whom he was speaking, and, indeed, a number of cases
seem to regard the witness recognition or identification of the voice of the person
with whom he spoke as essential to the admissibility of evidence of a telephone
conversation. The generally accepted view, however, is that the identity of the
speaker may be established by means other than the recognition of his voice.
Source: [Sec. 3, Rule 128, Question 8, p. 12, Francisco ,(library)]
48. What is the object of judicial notice?
The object of judicial notice is to save time, labor and expense in introducing
evidence on matters which are not ordinarily capable of dispute and are not actually
bona fide disputed, and the tenor of which can safely be assumed from the tribunals
general knowledge or from a slight search on its part. Judicial notice is therefore,
based upon convenience and expediency.
49. May stipulations of the parties or their counsel prevail over the
operation of the doctrine of judicial notice?
No. Stipulations and admissions of the parties or their counsel cannot prevail over
the operation of the doctrine of judicial notice, and such stipulations and admissions
are all subject to the operation of the doctrine.
50. Does failure to answer the complaint amount to judicial admission of the
facts alleged therein?
When a defendant is declared in default for having failed to answer the complaint,
such a failure does not amount to an admission of the facts alleged in the complaint.
If the defendant fails to answer within the time specified in the rules, the court shall,
upon motion of the plaintiff and proof of such failure, declare the defendant in
default. Thereupon, the court shall proceed to receive the plaintiff's evidence and
render judgement granting him such relief as the complaint and the facts proven may
warrant. In this connection, it has been proposed by the revision committee of the
rules of court that judgment be rendered rendered on the pleadings in case of default
on the part of the defendant.
51.When may a document be offered as object (real) evidence?
A document may constitute object (real) evidence. Whether it does so will depend
upon the purpose for which the document is tendered. If it is produced Qua chattel
and without regard to the message which it contains, for instance simply in order to
show that it exists, the quality of paper for which it is made or the fact that that it is
torn, it is treated as real and not as documentary evidence. Similarly, if a tombstone
is offered an evidence to prove what is written on it, then the tombstone is a
document. But what one is trying to prove is that the tombstone is found on the
tomb, turn it is object, not documentary evidence. The court may properly receive a
document for its inspection real or object evidence to aid it in determining whether it
is genuine or written in a counterfeit hand; whether it contains an alteration,
alteration, or mutilation; whether it was written on the same type writing machine as
another document.
52. What is the best evidence rule?
Rule 130. Section 3. Original document must be produced; exceptions. When the
subject of inquiry is the contents of a document, no evidence shall be admissible
other than the original document itself, except in the following cases:
(a) When the original has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court,
without bad faith on the part of the offeror;
(b) When the original is in the custody or under the control of the party against
whom the evidence is offered, and the latter fails to produce it after reasonable
notice;
(c) When the original consists of numerous accounts or other documents which
cannot be examined in court without great loss of time and the fact sought to be
established from them is only the general result of the whole; and
(d) When the original is a public record in the custody of a public officer or is
recorded in a public office.
57: IS PRACTICE(NOTICE) TO PRODUCE NECESSARY EVEN IF THE DOCUMENT
SOUGHT TO BE PRODUCED IS SUBJECT TO THE PRIVILEGE AGAINST SELF-
INCRIMINATION?: Ricardo Francisco Book, 1996 ed., page 80 , in relation to Sec. 6,
Rule 130
ANSWER: That document are subject to the privilege against self- incrimination is in
itself no excuse for not giving notice to produce; for the opponent might choose to
produce without exercising the privilege, and until notice has been given it cannot be
known whether he will do so.
Where the documents, notice to produce which has been given, are privileged from
production, and the party seeking to introduce the evidence has inspected and taken
copies of the documents, he can, notwithstanding the privilege, introduce such
secondary evidence on failure of his opponent to produce the writings.
This would not violate the constitutional privilege against self- incrimination, for the
privilege is merely that the possessor himself shall not furnish incriminating evidence,
and not that others shall not through their own witnesses do so.
58: WHAT IS THE PAROL EVIDENCE RULE?Francisco, page 84, in relation to Sec.
9, Rule 130
ANSWER: The so- called parol evidence forbids any addition to or contradiction of
the terms of a written instrument by testimony purporting to show that, at or before
the signing, of the document, other or different terms were orally agreed upon by the
parties.
The rights of the contracting parties must be measured by the contract which they
themselves made, and the Court cannot alter them because they work a hardship.
When an agreement has been reduced to writing, the parties cannot be permitted to
adduce evidence to prove alleged practices which to all purposes would alter the
terms of the written agreement. Whatever is not found in the writing must be
understood to have been waived and abandoned.
59: WHAT IS THE REASON OF PAROL EVIDENCE? Francisco, page 85
ANSWER: The reason for the rule is that when the parties have reduced their
agreement to writing, it is presumed that they have made the writing the only
repository and memorial of the truth, and whatever is not found in the writing must
be understood to have been waived and abandoned except in cases therein
specifically mentioned.
The parol evidence rule forbids any addition to or contradiction of the terms of a
written instrument. Oral testimony cannot prevail over a written agreement of the
parties, the purpose of the parol evidence rule being to give stability to written
agreements and to remove the temptation and possibility of perjury , which would be
afforded if parol evidence were admissible.
60: WHAT ARE THE QUALIFICATIONS OF A WITNESS? Francisco, page 118, in
relation to Sec.20, Rule 130
ANSWER: A person is qualified or is competent to be a witness, if
A. He is capable of perceiving, and
B. He can make his perception known.
It should be noted, however that loss of the perceptive sense after the occurrence of
the fact does not affect the admissibility of the testimony.
A witness may have been capable of perceiving, yet incapable of narration. He may
have no powers of speech, and have no means of expressing himself by signs. He
may have become insane since the occurrence he is called upon to relate. A person
incapable of narration is pro tanto incapable of testifying.
61. Can a person under the influence of drug become a competent witness?-
p 250, Riano (No.5)
Drug abuse will not render a person incompetent to testify (US v Behrens).
Drug abuse becomes relevant only if the witness was under the influence of
drugs at the time he is testifying or at the time events in question were
observed. (US v Novo Sampol)
While bias and drug abuse may not be grounds for barring a witness from
testifying, they may serve as grounds for attacking the credibility of the witness.
Factum probandum Factum probans
"ultimate facts" "intermediate facts"
Proposition to be established Material evidencing the proposition 62.
Hypothetical Existent
Factum probandum v Factum Probans- Francisco (p1), Riano (p23) and UP
reviewer on Evidence
Ultimate fact (factum probandum)
principal, determinate and constitutive facts upon the existence of which the
plaintiffs cause of action rests.
does not refer to the details of probative matter or particulars of evidence by
which these material elements are to be established
proposition to be established, necessarily hypothetical
Evidentiary facts (factum probans)
facts which are necessary for the determination of the ultimate facts
Premises upon which conclusions of ultimate facts are based
Brought forward as a reality to convince the tribunal that the factum
probandum is also real

63. Are Diaries admissible as evidence- Francisco (p182 No. 17)
As a rule, diaries are inadmissible because they are self-serving in nature,
unless they have the nature of books of account;
but it has also been held that an entry in a diary being in the nature of a
declaration,
if It was against interest when made, is admissible.
64. Requisites of newly discovered evidence- (Riano Crim Pro, p583; Rule 121
Sec 2; Tadeja v Pp Feb 20, 2013 )
For a newly discovered evidence to be a justifiable ground for a new trial, the
following requisites must concur:
(a) is discovered after trial
(b) could not have been discovered and produced at the trial even with the exercise
of reasonable diligence;
(c) is new and material, not merely cumulative, corroborative or impeaching; and
(d) is of such weight that it would probably change the judgment if admitted
The most important requisite is that the evidence could not have been discovered
and produced at the trial even with reasonable diligence; hence, the term newly
discovered.
65: Requisites of a dying declarion. Page 460 (Riano) Sec. 37 Rule 130 "Dying
declaration-
the declaration of a dying person, made under the consciousness of an impending
death, may be received in any case wherein his death is the subject of inquiry, as
evidence of the cause and surrounding circumstances of such death."
Requisites:
1. The declaration is one made by a dying person;
2. The declaration is made by said dying person under a consciousness of his
impending death;
3. The declaration refers to the cause and circumstances surrounding the death of the
declarant and not of anyone else;
4. The declaration is offered in a case where the declarant's death is the suject of
inquiry.
5. The declaration is offered is competent as a witness had he survived.
6. The declarant should have died.
66: When is an electronic device equivalent to an original document. Rule 4
Section 1 of the Rules on Electronic Evidence
An electronic document shall be regarded as equivalent of an original document
under the best evidence rule if it is a printout or output readable by sight or other
means, shown to reflect the data accurately.
67: Distinguish Object Evidence vs Demonstrative Page 39 Q4 (Francisco)
Object (real) Evidence is a tangible object that played some actual role in the matter
that give to the litigation. For instance, the knife used in the alteration that forms the
basis for the lawsuit.
Demostrative Evidence, by contrast, is tangible evidence that merely illustrates a
matter of importance in the litigation. Common types of demostrative evidence
includes maos, diagrams, models, summaries and other materials created especially
for the litigation.
68: When may a document be offered as object evidence? Page 53 Q3
(Francisco)
A document may constitute object evidence.
Whether it does so will depend upon the purpose for which the document is
tendered. If it produced qua chattel and without regard to the message which it
contains, for instance simply in order to show that it exists, the quality of the paper of
which it is or the fact that it is torn, it is treated as real not documentary evidence.
Similarly, "if a tombstone is offered in evidence to prove what is written on
it, thenthe tombstone is a document. But if what one trying to prove is that the
tombstone is found in tomb, then it is object, not documentary evidence."
The court may properly recieve a document for its inspection as real or
object evidence to aid it in determining whether it is genuine or written in a
counterfeit hand; whether it contains an alteration, erasure or mutilation; whether it
was written on the same typewriting machine as another document.
# 69. Can a tape recording be considered as documentary evidence instead
of being an object of evidence?
Ans: YES. Tape-recordings can be considered as documentary evidence if it is
played in order to show that particular words were uttered. However if a tape-
recording is played over in court simply to show that the words used were uttered
with a particular accent, the tape will usually be regarded as a piece of evidence.
#70. If the document is executed in duplicate or multiplicate form, which is
the original?
Ans: Where a document is executed in duplicate or multiplicate form, each one of
the parts is primary evidence of the contents of the document, and the other need
not be produced. In such a case, each is deemed an original.
#71. Are carbon copies, letter press copies, photographs, Xerox copies and
telegraphic messages considered as original?
Ans:
A. Carbon Copies: A carbon copy of a letter is a duplicate original and
admissible; it is not secondary evidence. It possesses all the probative value
of the original and the same does not require an accounting for the non-
production of the original. Carbon copies, however, when made at the same
time and on the same machine as the original, are duplicate originals, and
these have been held to be as much primary evidence as the original.
 B. Letter press copies: A letter press copy as consistently held by the
courts is not a duplicate original but merely secondary evidence. One of the
first techniques for accurate mechanical reproduction was the letter press.
Copies are produced by obtaining repeated ink traces from a single writing
so prepared to furnish such traces by pressure or by chemical operation.
Because of repeated failure of this method to properly reproduce, courts
have generally refused to grant letter press copies the status of duplicates.
Another reason is that they are not produced simultaneously with the
originals.
C. Photographs and xerox: Photographic copies of writing were, under the
common law, ordinarily considered secondary evidence rather than
duplicate originals. Courts clung to this position for three basic reasons.
First, photographic reproductions were produced at a later period in time
than the original and not by the same impression as the original. Second,
there was fear that photocopies could easily be tampered with, thereby,
becoming the subject of fraud. Third, early courts lacked understanding and
trust in the accuracy of early photographing process.
D. Telegraph messages: It is usually said that the original paper sent to a
telegraph office is primary evidence of the message sent as against the
sender, but not of the message received at the place of its delivery, and that
the telegram delivered to the person addressed is primary evidence as
against him of the communication he received, but only secondary evidence
of the message that was sent to him. But the most accurate rule is that
whether the dispatch sent or the dispatch received is the original, depends
upon the issue to be proved. If the fact in issue is the telegram as received,
the original is the telegram thus received. But if the issue is the telegram as
sent, then the original is thetelegram delivered for transmission.
3. Admission by a co-conspirator (Sec. 30, Rule 130)
4. Admission by privies (Sec.31, Rule 130)
The basis for admitting the above admissions is that the person making the
statement is under the same circumstances as the person against whom it is
offered. Such circumstances give him substantially the same interest and
the same motive to make a statement about certain matters. (Riano)
79: Define privies
Answer:
Privies are those who have mutual or successive relationship to the same right of
property or subject matter, such as personal representatives, heirs, devisees,
legatees, assigns, voluntary grantees or judgment creditors or purchasers from them
with notice to the facts. (Francisco)
Privies are persons who are partakers or have an interest in any action or thing, or
any relation to another. (Blacks Law Dictionary cited by Riano)
80 Is the admission by silence applicable to civil and criminal cases?
Answer:
Yes. Accordingly, admission by silence has been traditionally received, even in
common law, as admissible evidence. The usual pattern for its admissibility involves a
statement by a person in the presence of a party to the action, criminal or civil. The
statement contains assertions against the party which, if untrue, would be sufficient
cause for the party to deny. His failure to speak against the statement is admissible
as an admission. (Riano)
81. Distinguish RES GESTAE and DYING DECLARATION:
RES GESTAE literally means things done; it includes circumstances, facts, and
declarations incidental to the main facts or transaction necessary to illustrate its
character and also includes acts, words, or declarations which are closely connected
therewith as to constitute part of the transaction.

#72. E-mail print is considered original, how about e-mail in the monitor?
Ans: A.M. No. 01-7-01-SC.- Re: Rules on Electronic Evidence. Rule 4, SECTION
1. Original of an electronic document. An electronic document shall be regarded as RES GESTAE DYING
the equivalent of an original document under the Best Evidence Rule if it is a printout DECLARATION
or output readable by sight or other means, shown to reflect the data
accurately.
May be made by Can be made only
the by
77: What are self-serving declarations?
killer himself the victim.
Answer:
after or
Self-serving declarations are unsworn statements made by the declarant out of court
during the killing
and which are favorable to his interests. For example, the question between A and B
OR
is whether a certain deed is or is not forged. A affirms that it is genuine, B that it is
that of a 3rd
forged. A may prove a statement by B that the deed is genuine and B may prove a
person.
statement of A that it is forged; but A cannot prove a statement by himself that the
deed is genuine not can B prove a statement by himself that the deed is forged.
A self-serving declaration is one made by a party in his own interest at some place
May precede or Made only after
and time out of court and it does not include testimony which he gives as a witness t
be the
the trial. (Francisco)
made after the homicidal attack
homicidal attack has
was been committed.
78: The rights of a party can not be prejudiced by an act, declaration or
committed.
admission of another person. What is/are the exceptions?
Answer:
1. Admission by a co-partner (Sec.29, Rule 130)
2. Admission by an agent (bid.)

Justification in Trustworthiness
the based
spontaneity of upon in its being
the given
statement. in awareness of
impending death.
82. EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION:
JUDICIAL CONFESSION - one made before a court in which the case is pending and
in the course of legal proceedings therein and, by itself, can sustain a conviction even
in capital offenses.
EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION - one made in any other place or occasion and
cannot sustain a conviction unless corroborated by evidence of the corpus delicti.
This section refers to extrajudicial confessions.
83. Exceptions to RES INTER ALIOS ACTA
Res inter alios acta
The expression if fully expressed reads: res inter alios acta alteri nocere non
debet which literally means that things done to strangers ought not to injure those
who are not parties to them (Blacks, 5th Ed., 1178).
Branches
The res inter alios acta rule has two branches, namely:
(a) The rule that the rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act,declaration, or
omission or another (Sec. 28, Rule 130, Rules of Court)
(b) The rule that evidence of previous conduct or similar acts at one time is not
admissible to prove that one did or did not do the same act at another time (Sec. 34,
Rule 132, Rules of Court).
Exceptions to the res inter alios acta rule
The first branch of the rule admits of certain exception, to wit:
(a) admission by a co-partner or agent (Sec. 29, Rule 130);
(b) admission by a co-conspirator (Sec. 30, Rule 130; and
(c) admission by privies (Sec. 31, Rule 130).
84. Disqualification by reason of privileged communication:
1. The husband or the wife, during or after the marriage, cannot be examined
without the consent of the other as to any communication received in confidence by
one from the other during the marriage except in a civil case by one against the
other, or in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the
latters direct descendants or ascendants
2. An attorney cannot, without the consent of his client, be examined as to any
communication made by the client to him, or
his advice given thereon in the course of, or with a view to, professional employment,
nor can an attorneys secretary, stenographer, or clerk be examined, without the
consent of the client and his employer, concerning any fact the knowledge of which
has been acquired in such capacity.
3. A person authorized to practice medicine, surgery or obstetrics cannot in a
civil case, without the consent of the patient, be examined as to any evidence or
treatment given by him or any information which he may have acquired in attending
such patient in a professional capacity, which information was necessary to enable
him to act in that capacity, and which would blacken the reputation of the patient.
4. A minister or priest cannot, without the consent of the patient, be examined as
to any advice or treatment given by him or any information which he may have
acquired in attending such patient in a professional capacity, which information was
necessary to enable him to act in that capacity, and which would blacken the
reputation of the patient.
5. A public officer cannot be examined during his term of office or afterwards, as to
communications made to him in official confidence, when the court finds that the
public interest would suffer by the disclosure.
85. OFFER OF COMPROMISE:
Section 27. Offer of compromise not admissible
COMPROMISE - is an agreement made between two or more parties as a settlement
matters in dispute.
Civil cases - an offer of compromise is not an admission of any liability, and is not
admissible in evidence against the offeror.
Criminal cases - except those involving quasioffenses (criminal negligence) or those
allowed by law to be compromised, an offer of compromise by the accused may be
received in evidence as an
implied admission of guilt.
A compromise agreement is valid when the true essence of which resides in
reciprocal concessions.
GENERAL RULE
An offer of compromise is not an admission of any liability and is not admissible in
evidence against an offeror.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. an express admission of liability made during negotiations for a compromise;
2. Express and unqualified admission of indebtedness accompanying an offer of
compromise;
3. An admission of the correctness of an account or of specific items;
4. admission involving interest in property;
5. admission affecting liability for a tort.
85. Is an offer to pay medical, hospital, and similar expenses occasioned by
an injury admissable proof of Civil or Criminal liability for the injury?
The rule provides that "an offer to pay or the payment of medical, hospital or similar
expenses occasioned by an injury is not admissible in evidence as proof of civil or
criminal liability for the injury." A similar provision exist in the Federal Rules of
Evidence. Most courts exclude evidence of furnishing or offering or promising to pay
medical, hospital, or similar expenses occasioned by the injury. The traditional ground
for this rule is that the payment or offer is usually made from humane impulses and 89. Requisites for admissibility of electronic evidence
not from the admission of liability. -Evidence by RJ Francisco, pg 189
Admissibility An electronic document is admissible in evidence if it complies with
An offer to pay or the payment of medical, hospital or other expenses occasioned by the rules on admissibility prescribed by the Rules of Court and related laws and is
authenticated in the manner prescribed by these Rules. (Rule 3, Sec 2 Rule on
an injury is not admissible in evidence as proof of civil or criminal liability for injury. In
Electronic Evidence)
this jurisdiction, this act of rendering aid is sometimes called the " good samaritan
rule." The phrase is used to refer to rendering of voluntary aid to a suffering person. 90. What is connecting up?
-Evidence by Riano, pg. 412-413
Connecting up doctrine is a rule relating to the admissibility of evidence whereby
86. Rule on independent relevant statement. evidence is allowed to be conditionally admitted if the offering party promises to
show relevance by adducing other evidence. The introduction of subsequent evidence
Where, regardless of the truth or the falsity of a statement, the fact that it has been
will connect up the earlier evidence, but if the original evidence is never connected
made is relevant, the hearsay rule does not apply but the statement may be shown.
to the case, it will be disregarded by the factfinder.
Evidence as to making of such statement is not secondary but primary, for the
statement itself may constitute a fact in issue, or be circumstantially relevant as to
the existence of such fact. The independent relevant statements may be grouped into
two classes:
a. Those statements which are the very fact in issue; and
b. Those statements which are circumstantial evidence of the fact in issue.
-Evidence by Francisco, pg 250

91. 3 kinds of concomitant circumstances

87. Testimony or desposition of a former proceedings.
The testimony or desposition of a witness deceased or unable to testify, given in a Alibi - It is a defense where an accused claims that he was somewhere else at the
former case or proceeding, judicial or administrative, involving the same parties and time of the commission of the offense.
subject matter, may be given in evidence against the adverse party who had
For the defense of alibi to prosper, the accused must show that: 1. He was
opportunity to cross-examine him. The reason for its admissability, having been given
somewhere else; and 2. It was physically impossible for him to be at the scene of the
in a former action under a solemn oath, where the witness was or might have been
crime at the time of its commission. (People v. Gerones, et.al., G.R. No. L-6595, Oct.
cross-examined, the probabilities of truth having been told are so great as to justify
29, 1954)
the resort to the testimony. -Evidence by Francisco, pg. 341
Opportunity - If the accused was the only one who has the opportunity to do the act
88. Rule 130, sec. 51 charged such circumstance may be taken against him. Exclusive opportunity is not
Character evidence not generally admissible except: essential. It is enough that the person charged had the opportunity to do the act.
A. In Criminal cases
Incompatibility - When the concomitant circumstances are incompatible with the
1. The accused may prove his good moral character which is pertinent to the moral
doing of an act by a person they may be proved to show that such person is not the
trait involved in the offense charged.
author of the act.
2. Unless in rebuttal, the prosecution may not prove his bad moral character which is
pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense charged. 92. What is substantial evidence?
3. The good or bad moral character of the offended party may be proved if it tends to
It is that amount of relevant evidence which a reasonable mind might accept as
establish in any reasonable degree the probability or improbability of the offense
adequate to justify a conclusion. In cases filed before administrative or quasi-judicial
charged.
bodies, a fact may be deemed established if it is supported by substantial evidence.
B. In Civil Cases;
Evidence of moral character of the party in a civil case is admissible only when 97. relevancy vs. admissibility
pertinent to the issue of character involved in the case.
Relevancy means that an evidence relates directly to a fact in issue; or to a fact from
C. In the case provided for in Rule 132, sec 14. -Revised Rules of Court. which, by the process of logic, an inferrence may be made as to the existence or non-
existence of a fact in issue.
Admissibility is determined, first, by relevancy - an affair of logic and not of law; and
second, by the law of eviudence which, in strictness, only declares whether matter
whuich is logically probvative is excluded.

98. what is documentary evidence?

Documentary evidence is evidence supplied by written instruments, or derived from
conventional symbols, such as letters, by which ideas are presented on material
substances. it includes books, papers, accounts, and the like.

Documents as evidence consists of writings or any material containing letters, words,

numbers, figures or other modes of writen expressions offered as proof of their
contents.

99.Evidence vs. proof

Proof is the result of evidence while evidence is the medium of proof.

100. Physical evidence

Physical evidence usually involves objects found at the scene of a crime. Physical
evidence may consist of all sorts of prints such as fingerprints, footprints, handprints,
tidemarks, cut marks, tool marks,

102. Distinction between Best Evidence and Parol Evidence (Riano

Reviewer)

Best Evidence Rule Parol Evidence Rule

Establishes a preference for the
original document over secondary
evidence thereof.
Precludes the admission of secondary
evidence if the original document is
available.
Can be invoked by any litigant to an
action whether or not said litigant is a
party to the document involved.
Applies to all forms of writing
Presupposes the original is available
Precludes the admission of other evidence
to prove the terms of a document other than
the contents of the document itself for the
purpose of varying the terms of the writing.
Can be invoked only by the parties to the
document and their successors in interest.
Applies only to written contracts and wills.