UP COLLEGE OF LAW EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION

PAGE 211
UP COLLEGE OF LAW EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION

General Principles of on the accused [Sec. 14,

Art. III]
Evidence
PROOF vs. EVIDENCE
CONCEPT OF EVIDENCE Proof Evidence
The means, sanctioned by these rules, of
ascertaining in a judicial proceeding, the truth Result or effect of Mode and manner of
respecting a matter of fact [Sec. 1, Rule 128] evidence [Regalado] proving competent facts
in judicial proceedings
SCOPE OF THE RULES OF EVIDENCE [Bustos v. Lucero, 81 Phil
General rule: Principle of uniformity 640]
Rules of evidence shall be the same in all courts and
in all trials and hearings. [Sec. 2, Rule 128] FACTUM PROBANS vs. FACTUM PROBANDUM

Exception: If otherwise provided by: Civil Cases Criminal Cases

(1) Law (e.g., 1987 Constitution, statutes); Facts or material The proposition to be
(2) Rules of Court. [Sec. 2, Rule 128] evidencing the established
proposition
APPLICABILITY
The rules of evidence are specifically applicable only The evidentiary fact The ultimate fact sought
in judicial proceedings. [Sec. 1, Rule 128] tending to prove the fact to be established
in issue
In quasi-judicial proceedings, the same apply by Facts or material The proposition to be
analogy [Sec. 4, Rule 1], except in cases where the evidencing the established
governing law in the particular proceeding proposition
specifically adopts the rules of evidence in the Rules [Source: Regalado]
of Court. [Regalado]
CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE
Administrative investigations shall be conducted Object, documentary and testimonial evidence
without necessarily adhering strictly to the technical
rules of procedure and evidence applicable to judicial Object Documentary Testimonial
proceedings [Dela Cruz v. Malunao (2012)] Addressed to Consist of Testimony or
the senses of the writings or any deposition of a
Note: There is a different rule for Rules on Electronic court. [Sec. 1, material witness
Evidence since it covers quasi-judicial and Rule 130] containing
administrative bodies [Sec, 2, Rule 1, Rules on letters, words,
Electronic Evidence] numbers,
figures, symbols
EVIDENCE IN CIVIL CASES vs. EVIDENCE IN or other modes
CRIMINAL CASES of written
Civil Cases Criminal Cases expressions
offered as proof
Preponderance of Proof beyond reasonable of their contents
evidence [Sec. 1, Rule 133] doubt [Sec. 2, Rule 133] [Sec. 2, Rule 130]
Offer of compromise NOT Offer of compromise by
an admission of any the accused may be Cumulative and corroborative evidence
liability [Sec. 27, Rule 130] received in evidence as an Cumulative Corroborative
implied admission of guilt
(except for quasi-offenses Evidence of the same Additional evidence of a
or those allowed by law kind and to the same different character to the
to be compromised) [Sec. state of facts same point
27, Rule 130]
Presumption of Presumption of Prima facie and conclusive evidence
innocence does NOT innocence a Prima facie Conclusive
apply constitutional guarantee

PAGE 212
UP COLLEGE OF LAW EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION

Standing alone, unexplained Class of evidence Exclusionary rules of evidence by law are either
or uncontradicted, is which the law does constitutional or statutory, as such:
sufficient to maintain the not allow to be
proposition affirmed contradicted Constitutional Statutory

Primary and secondary evidence Unreasonable searches Lack of documentary

and seizures; privacy of stamp tax to documents
Primary Secondary communication and required to have one
correspondence. [Secs. makes such document
(a) Best Evidence (a) Substitutionary
2-3, Art. III] inadmissible as evidence
(b) That which the law Evidence
in court until the requisite
regards as affording (b) Inferior to primary;
stamp/s shall have been
the greatest permitted only when
affixed thereto and
certainty of the fact the best evidence is
cancelled. [Sec. 201, NIRC]
in question not available
Miranda Rights: right to Any communication
counsel, prohibition of obtained by a person, not
ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE torture, force, violence, being authorized by all the
REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE threat, intimidation or parties to any private
Evidence is admissible when it is: other means which communication, by
(1) Relevant to the issue and vitiate the free will; tapping any wire/cable or
(2) Not excluded by law or the ROC. [Sec. 3, Rule 128] prohibition of secret using any other
detention places, device/arrangement to
WHEN DETERMINED solitary, incommunicado. secretly
Admissibility is determined at the time it is offered to [Sec. 12, Art. III] overhear/intercept/record
the court [Sec. 35, Rule 132] such information by using
any device, shall not be
RELEVANCE OF EVIDENCE & COLLATERAL MATTERS admissible in evidence in
Relevancy any judicial/quasi-
Evidence must have such a relation to the fact in judicial/legislative/
issue as to induce belief in its existence or non- administrative hearing or
existence. [Sec. 4, Rule 128] investigation. [Secs. 1 and
4, R.A. 4200 (Wire-
Collateral matters Tapping Act)]
Matters other than the fact in issue which are offered No person shall be Rules on Electronic
as a basis for inference as to the existence or non- compelled to be a Evidence [Sec. 1,Rule 9,]
existence of the facts in issue [Regalado] witness against himself.
[Sec.17, Art.III]
General Rule: Evidence on collateral matters is NOT
allowed. [Sec. 4, Rule 128] Under the ROC, Rule 130 is the applicable rule in
determining the admissibility of evidence.
Exception: When it tends in any reasonable degree to
establish the probability or improbability of the fact Note: Evidence illegally obtained is inadmissible on a
in issue. [Sec. 4, Rule 128] timely motion or action to suppress [Stonehill v.
Diokno (1967)]
Note: What is prohibited by the Rules is not evidence
of all collateral matters, but evidence of irrelevant DOCTRINES OF ADMISSIBILITY
collateral facts. [Regalado] (1) Multiple admissibility—Where the evidence is
relevant and competent for two or more
Competence purposes, such evidence shall be admitted for any
Evidence not excluded by: or all the purposes for which it is offered, provided
(1) Law, or it satisfies all the requisites of law for its
(2) The ROC [Sec. 3, Rule 128] admissibility therefor. [Regalado]
Determined by the prevailing exclusionary rules of
evidence [Regalado] (2) Conditional admissibility—Where the evidence at
the time of its offer appears to be immaterial or
irrelevant unless it is connected with the other

PAGE 213
UP COLLEGE OF LAW EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION

facts to be subsequently proved, such evidence Burden of Proof Burden of Evidence

may be received, on condition that the other facts
will be proved thereafter; otherwise, the evidence evidence that he has
already given shall be stricken out. presented) that he (the
potential proponent) has
Note: This is applied in the case of People v. Yatco to overcome. That factum
(97 Phil 940) subject to the qualification that probandum may, but does
there should be no bad faith on the part of the not have to be, nor is
proponent. The qualification appears to avoid limited to a "prima facie
unfair surprises. [Regalado] presumption." Likewise, a
party will not have any
(3) Curative admissibility—Where the court has burden of evidence at all if
admitted incompetent evidence adduced by the the adverse party has not
adverse party, a party has a right to introduce the established any factum
same kind of evidence in his/her behalf. probandum in the first
[Regalado] place. (Prof. Victoria A.
Avena)
Direct evidence vs. circumstantial evidence
Does not shift Shifts from party to party
Direct Circumstantial throughout the trial depending upon the
exigencies of the case in
Proves the fact in dispute Proof of a fact/s from
the course of the trial
without the aid of any which, taken either singly
inference or presumption or collectively, the Generally determined by Generally determined by
existence of a particular the pleadings filed by the the developments at the
fact in dispute may be party trial, or by the provisions
inferred as a necessary or of substantive or
probable consequence procedural law

Positive evidence vs. negative evidence WHERE BURDEN OF PROOF IS FIXED

The burden of proof is fixed by pleadings. [Riano]
Positive Negative
Witness affirms that a Witness states he/she did EQUIPOISE RULE/EQUIPONDERANCE DOCTRINE
fact did or did not occur not see or know of the The doctrine refers to the situation where the
occurrence of a fact (e.g., evidence of the parties are evenly balanced or there
denial) is doubt on which side the evidence preponderates.
In this case, the decision should be against the party
Competence vs. credibility with the burden of proof. [Rivera v. CA (284 SCRA
672); Marubeni v. Lirag (2001)]
Competence Credibility
Eligibility of evidence to Worthiness of belief; In criminal cases, the equipoise rule provides that
be received as such “believability” where the evidence is evenly balanced, the
constitutional presumption of innocence tilts the
scales in favor of the accused. [Malana v. People
(2008)]
BURDEN OF PROOF AND BURDEN OF EVIDENCE
Burden of Proof Burden of Evidence PRESUMPTIONS
Duty of a party to present A party will have the Conclusive Disputable
evidence on the facts in burden of evidence only Inferences which the law Satisfactory if
issue necessary to (i.e., will have to be a makes so peremptory uncontradicted, but may
establish his/her claim or proponent) if there is any that it will not allow them be contradicted and
defense by the amount factum probandum to be overturned by any overcome by other
of evidence required by (whether evidentiary or contrary proof however evidence [Sec. 3, Rule 131]
law [Sec. 1, Rule 131] otherwise) that the strong [Datalift Movers v.
adverse party has already Belgravia Realty (2006)]
established (whether by
law, rule, or by virtue of

PAGE 214
UP COLLEGE OF LAW EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION

administrative or quasi-judicial bodies [Sec. 5, Rule

133]
LIBERAL CONSTRUCTION OF THE RULES OF
EVIDENCE The amount of relevant evidence which a reasonable
Like all other provisions under the ROC, rules of mind might accept as adequate to support a
evidence must be liberally construed. [Sec. 6, Rule 1] conclusion [Sec. 5, Rule 133]

Rules on Electronic Evidence shall likewise be CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE

construed liberally. [Sec. 2, Rule 2, Rules on Electronic Standard of proof required in granting or denying
Evidence] bail in extradition cases [Government of Hongkong
Special Administrative Region v Olalia, Jr. (2007)]
QUANTUM OF EVIDENCE (WEIGHT AND
SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE) Intermediate in character – lower than proof beyond
reasonable doubt, but higher than preponderance of
PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT evidence
Applicable quantum of evidence in criminal cases
[Sec. 2, Rule 133]

Only moral certainty is required – that degree of

proof which produces conviction in an unprejudiced Judicial Notice and Judicial
mind. [Sec. 2, Rule 133] Admissions
The burden is on the prosecution to prove guilt
WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED
beyond reasonable doubt, NOT on the accused to
(1) Facts of Judicial Notice
prove his/her innocence. [Boac v People (2008)]
(2) Judicial Admissions
(3) Conclusive Presumptions
The prosecution must not rely on the weakness of
the evidence of the defense. [Ubales v People (2008); JUDICIAL NOTICE
People v Hu (2008)] Judicial notice is the cognizance of certain facts that
judges may properly take and act on without proof
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE
because these facts are already known to them. Put
Applicable quantum of evidence in civil cases [Sec. 1, differently, it is the assumption by a court of a fact
Rule 133] without need of further traditional evidentiary
support. The principle is based on convenience and
Means that the evidence adduced by one side is, as a expediency in securing and introducing evidence on
whole, superior to or has greater weight than that of matters which are not ordinarily capable of dispute
the other. [Habagat Grill v. DMC-Urban Property and are not bona fide disputed. [Republic v.
Developer, Inc.(2005); Bank of the Philippine Islands v Sandiganbayan (2011)]
Reyes (2008)]
MATTERS OF JUDICIAL NOTICE
In determining preponderance of evidence, the court MANDATORY
may consider: Needs no introduction of evidence [Sec. 1, Rule 129]:
(1) All the facts and circumstances of the case; (1) Existence and territorial extent of states;
(2) The witnesses’ manner of testifying, their (2) Their political history, forms of government, and
intelligence, their means and opportunity of symbols of nationality;
knowing the facts to which they testify, the nature (3) Law of nations;
of the facts to which they testify, the probability or (4) Admiralty and maritime courts of the world and
improbability of their testimony; their seals;
(3) The witnesses’ interest or want of interest, and (5) Political constitution and history of the
also their personal credibility so far as the same Philippines;
may legitimately appear upon the trial; (6) Official acts of the legislative, executive and
(4) Number of witnesses (although preponderance is judicial departments of the Philippines;
not necessarily equated with the number of (7) Laws of nature;
witnesses). [Sec. 1, Rule 133] (8) Measure of time; and
(9) Geographical divisions.
SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
Degree of evidence required in cases filed before

PAGE 215
UP COLLEGE OF LAW
Note: It would be error for the court not to take
judicial notice of an amendment to the Rules of
Court [Riano citing Siena Realty v. Gal-lang (428
SCRA 422)]
DISCRETIONARY
(1) Matters of public knowledge;
(2) Matters capable of unquestionable
demonstration; and
(3) Matters ought to be known to judges because of
their judicial functions. [Sec. 2, Rule 129]
REQUISITES
For the court to take judicial notice, three material
requisites should be present:
(1) The matter must be one of common and general
knowledge;
(2) It must be well and authoritatively settled and
not doubtful or uncertain;
(3) It must be known to be within the limits of the
jurisdiction of the court. [State Prosecutors v, Muro
(1994)]
Judicial notice is not judicial knowledge. The mere
personal knowledge of the judge is not the judicial
knowledge of the court, and he is not authorized to
make his individual knowledge of a fact, not
generally or professionally known, the basis of his
action. Judicial cognizance is taken only of those
matters which are "commonly" known. [State
Prosecutors v. Muro (1994)]
With Respect to Court’s Own Acts and Records
A court MAY take judicial notice of its own acts and
records in the same case. [Republic v Court of
Appeals (1997)]
With Respect to Records of Other Cases
General Rule: Courts CANNOT take judicial notice of
the contents or records of other cases even if both
cases may have been tried or are pending before the
same judge. [Prieto v. Arroyo (1965)]
Exceptions:
(1) When there is no objection, with the knowledge of
the opposing party, the contents of said other
case are clearly referred to and adopted or read
into the record of the latter; or
(2) When the original or part of the records of the
case is actually withdrawn from the archives at
the court’s discretion upon the request, or with
the consent, of the parties, and admitted as part
of the record of the pending case [Tabuena v. CA
(1991)]
The principal guide in determining what facts may be
assumed to be judicially known is that of notoriety. It
PAGE 216
EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION
is either 1) generally known within the territorial
jurisdiction of the trial court; or b) capable of
accurate and ready determination by resorting to
sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be
questionable. [Riano]
JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS
To be a judicial admission, the same:
(1) Must be made by a party to the case;
(2) Must be made in the course of the proceedings in
the same case; and
(3) May be verbal or written. [Sec. 4, Rule 129]
As regards judicial admissions made in the trial of
another case: the same would be considered an
extrajudicial admission for the purpose of the other
proceeding where such admission is offered. [Riano]
WHERE JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS MAY BE MADE
(a) Pleadings filed by the parties (including
admissions made in pleadings which are
withdrawn/superseded by an amended pleading
[Regalado])
(b) The course of the trial either by verbal/written
manifestations/stipulations
(c) Other stages of judicial proceedings
HOW JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS MAY BE OBTAINED
(a) Depositions
(b) Written interrogatories
(c) Request for admissions [Regalado; see also Civil
Procedure Rules]
There are averments made in pleadings which are
not deemed admissions even if the adverse party
fails to make a specific denial of the same like
immaterial allegations (Sec. 11, Rule 8), conclusions,
non-ultimate facts in the pleading (Sec. 1, Rule 8) as
well as the amount of liquidated damages (Sec. 11,
Rule 8). [Riano]
Although an admission made during the pre-trial is
deemed to have been made in the course of the
judicial proceeding and is necessarily a judicial
admission, an admission made by the accused in the
pre-trial of a criminal case is not necessarily
admissible against him. To be admissible, it must
comply with the conditions set forth under Sec. 2,
Rule 118 [Riano]
EFFECT OF JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS
(1) It does NOT require proof. [Sec. 4, Rule 129]
(2) It is conclusive upon the party making it, and
hence, CANNOT be contradicted. [Sec. 4, Rule
129]
UP COLLEGE OF LAW
An original complaint, after being amended, loses its
character as a judicial admission, which would have
required no proof. It becomes merely an extra-
judicial admission requiring a formal offer to be
admissible. [Torres v CA (1984)].
A party who judicially admits a fact cannot later
challenge that fact as judicial admissions are a
waiver of proof; production of evidence is dispensed
with. [Alfelor v Halasan (2006)]
HOW JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS MAY BE CONTRADICTED
As an exception to the general rule, judicial
admissions may be contradicted only by showing
that:
(1) It was made through palpable mistake; [Sec. 4,
Rule 129]
(2) No such admission was made. [Sec. 4, Rule 129]
This may be invoked when the statement of a
party is taken out of context or that his statement
was made not in the sense it is made to appear by
the other party [Phil. Health Care Providers v.
Estrada, 2008 citing Atillo, III v. CA, 1997]
CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTIONS
Instances of Conclusive Presumptions
[Sec. 2, Rule 131]
(1) Whenever a party has, by his own
declaration/act/omission, intentionally and
deliberately led another to believe a particular
thing is true and to act upon such belief, he
cannot, in any litigation arising out of such
declaration/act/omission, be permitted to falsify
it.
(2) The tenant is not permitted to deny the title of his
landlord at the time of the commencement of the
relation of landlord and tenant between them.
As Distinguished from Disputable Presumptions
[Sec. 3, Rule 131]
(1) Person is innocent of a crime or wrong;
(2) Unlawful act is done with an unlawful intent;
(3) Person intends the ordinary consequences of his
voluntary act;
(4) Person takes ordinary care of his concerns;
(5) Evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse
if produced;
(6) Money paid by one to another was due to the
latter;
(7) Thing delivered by one to another belonged to
the latter;
(8) Obligation delivered up to the debtor has been
paid;
(9) Prior rents or installments had been paid when a
receipt for the later ones is produced;
(10) A person found in possession of a thing taken in
the doing of a recent wrongful act is the taker
PAGE 217
EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION
and doer of the whole act; otherwise, that things
which a person possesses or exercises acts of
ownership over, are owned by him;
(11) Person in possession of an order on himself for
the payment of the money or the delivery of
anything has paid the money or delivered the
thing accordingly;
(12) Person acting in public office was regularly
appointed or elected to it;
(13) Official duty has been regularly performed;
(14) A court or judge acting as such, whether in the
Philippines or elsewhere, was acting in the
lawful exercise of jurisdiction;
(15) All the matters within an issue raised in a case
were laid before the court and passed upon by it;
all matters within an issue raised in a dispute
submitted for arbitration were laid before
arbitrators and passed upon by them;
(16) Private transactions have been fair and regular;
(17) Ordinary course of business has been followed;
(18) There was a sufficient consideration for a
contract;
(19) Negotiable instrument was given or indorsed for
a sufficient consideration;
(20) An indorsement of negotiable instrument was
made before the instrument was overdue and at
the place where the instrument is dated;
(21) A writing is truly dated;
(22) Letter duly directed and mailed was received in
the regular course of the mail;
(23) Presumptions concerning absence:
(a) Ordinary but continued absence of:
(i) 7 years, it being unknown WON the
absentee still lives, he is considered
dead for all purposes, except for those
of succession
(ii) 10 years—the absentee shall be
considered dead for the purpose of
opening his succession; but if he
disappeared after the age of 75 years,
an absence of 5 years shall be sufficient
to open his succession
(iii) 4 consecutive years—the spouse
present may contract a subsequent
marriage if s/he has a well-founded
belief that the absent spouse is already
dead; but where there is danger of
death, an absence of only 2 years shall
be sufficient for remarriage
(b) Qualified absence
(i) A person on board a vessel lost during
a sea voyage, or an aircraft which is
missing, who has not been heard of for
4 years since the loss of the vessel or
aircraft
(ii) A member of the armed forces who has
taken part in armed hostilities, and has
UP COLLEGE OF LAW EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION

been missing for 4 years reports of cases adjudged in tribunals of the

(iii) A person who has been in danger of country where the book is published, contains
death under other circumstances and correct reports of such cases;
whose existence has not been known (35) A trustee or other person whose duty it was to
for 4 years convey real property to a particular person has
(24) Acquiescence resulted from a belief that the actually conveyed it to him when such
thing acquiesced in was conformable to the presumption is necessary to perfect the title of
law/fact; such person or his successor in interest;
(25) Things have happened according to the ordinary (36) Presumptions regarding survivorship:
course of nature and ordinary nature habits of (Applicable for all purposes except succession)
life; (a) When 2 persons perish in the same
(26) Persons acting as copartners have entered into a calamity,
contract of co-partnership; (b) And it is not shown who died first,
(27) A man and woman deporting themselves as (c) And there are no particular circumstances
husband and wife have entered into a lawful from which it can be inferred,
contract of marriage; (d) The survivorship is determined from the
(28) Property acquired by a man and a woman who probabilities resulting from the strength
are capacitated to marry each other and who live and the age of the sexes:
exclusively with each other as husband and wife
without the benefit of marriage or under a void Situation Person presumed to have survived
marriage, has been obtained by their joint
efforts, work or industry; Both < 15 y/o The older
(29) In cases of cohabitation by a man and a woman
Both > 60 y/o The younger
who are not capacitated to marry each other and
who have acquired property through their actual One < 15 y/o,
joint contribution of money, property or industry, the other > 60 The one <15
such contributions and their corresponding y/o
shares including joint deposits of money and Both > 15 and <
evidences of credit are equal; 60 y/o, of The male
(30) Presumptions governing children of women who different sexes
contracted another marriage within 300 days
after termination of her former marriage (in the Both > 15 and
absence of proof to the contrary): <60 y/o, of the The older
same sex
When child was born Presumption
(37) As between 2 or more persons called to succeed
Before 180 days Considered to have been each other: If there is a doubt as to which of
after the conceived during the former them died first, whoever alleges the death of
solemnization of the marriage, provided it be born one prior to the other, shall prove the same. In
subsequent within 300 days after the the absence of proof, they shall be considered to
marriage termination of the former have died at the same time.
marriage
JUDICIAL NOTICE OF FOREIGN LAWS, LAW OF
After 180 days Considered to have been
NATIONS AND MUNICIPAL ORDINANCES
following the conceived during the
celebration of the subsequent marriage, even
FOREIGN LAWS
subsequent though it be born within the
General Rule: Courts cannot take judicial notice of
marriage 300 days after the termination
foreign laws. [Yao-Kee v. Sy-Gonzales (1988)]
of the former marriage.
Exceptions: The court may take judicial notice of the
(31) A thing once proved to exist continues as long as foreign law:
is usual with things of the nature; (1) Where the foreign law is within the actual
(32) The law has been obeyed; knowledge of the court such as when the law is
(33) A printed/published book, purporting to be generally well-known, had been ruled upon in
printed/published by public authority, was so previous cases before it and none of the parties
printed/published; claim otherwise [PCIB v Escolin (1974)]
(34) A printed/published book, purporting to contain

PAGE 218
UP COLLEGE OF LAW
(2) When the foreign law is part of a published
treatise, periodical or pamphlet and the writer is
recognized in his/her profession or calling as
expert in the subject [Sec. 46, Rule 130]
Under the Doctrine of Processual Presumption: In the
absence of proof, the foreign law will be presumed to
be the same as the laws of the jurisdiction hearing
the case. [Northwest Orient Airlines v Court of Appeals
(1995)]
LAW OF NATIONS
The Philippines adopts the generally accepted
principles of international law as part of the law of
the land. [Sec. 2, Art. II, 1987 Constitution]
Being part of the law of the land, they are therefore
in the nature of local laws, and hence, subject to
mandatory judicial notice under Sec. 1 of Rule 129.
MUNICIPAL ORDINANCES
Municipal trial courts are required to take judicial
notice of the ordinances of the municipality or city
wherein they sit. [(US v. Blanco, 37 Phil 126)]
However, in the case of the RTC, they must take such
judicial notice only (a) when required to do so by
statute (City of Manila v. Garcia (1967)); and b) in a
case of appeal before them wherein the inferior court
took judicial notice of an ordinance involved in said
case [(US v. Blanco, 37 Phil 126)] [Regalado]
Object (Real) Evidence
NATURE OF OBJECT EVIDENCE
Those addressed to the senses of the court [Sec. 1,
Rule 130]
The right against self-incrimination CANNOT be
invoked against object evidence. [People v. Malimit,
(1996)]
REQUISITES OF ADMISSIBILITY
(1) Evidence must be relevant;
(2) Evidence must be authenticated;
(3) Authentication must be made by a competent
witness; and
(4) Object must be formally offered [Sec. 34, Rule
132]
RELEVANT
General Rule: When an object is relevant to the fact in
issue, it may be exhibited to, examined or viewed by
the court. [Sec. 1, Rule 130]
PAGE 219
EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION
Exceptions: Court may refuse exhibition of object
evidence and rely on testimonial evidence alone if:
(1) Exhibition is contrary to public policy, morals or
decency;
(2) It would result in delays, inconvenience,
unnecessary expenses, out of proportion to the
evidentiary value of such object; [People v. Tavera]
(3) Evidence would be confusing or misleading.
[People v. Saavedra]
COMPETENT
Evidence be Authenticated
To authenticate the object is to show that the object
is the very thing that is either the subject matter of
the lawsuit or the very one involved to prove an issue
in the case.
Authentication be Made by Competent Witness
To authenticate the object, the witness must have
the capacity to identify the object as the very thing
involved in the litigation.
A witness can testify to those facts which he/she
knows of his/her personal knowledge; that is, which
are derived from his/her own perception. [Sec. 36,
Rule 130]
CATEGORIES OF OBJECT EVIDENCE
“The thing itself”
UNIQUE OBJECTS
Objects that have readily identifiable marks, e.g., a
caliber 45 pistol by virtue of its serial number
OBJECTS MADE UNIQUE
Objects with no unique characteristic but are made
readily identifiable, e.g., a typical kitchen knife with
identifying marks placed on it by the witness
NON-UNIQUE OBJECTS
Objects with no identifying marks and cannot be
marked, e.g., narcotic substances
DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE
Not the actual thing, rather it represents or
“demonstrates” the real thing, e.g., photographs,
motion pictures and recordings [Riano]
Audio, photographic and video evidence of events,
acts or transactions shall be admissible provided
they shall be:
(1) Shown, presented or displayed to the court; and
(2) Identified, explained or authenticated:
(a) By the person who made the recording, or
UP COLLEGE OF LAW
(b) By some other person competent to testify on
the accuracy thereof [Sec. 1, Rule 11, Rules on
Electronic Evidence]
EPHEMERAL ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS
Refers to telephone conversations, text messages,
chatroom sessions, streaming audio, streaming
video, and other electronic forms of communication
the evidence of which is not recorded or retained.
[Sec. 1(k), Rule 2, Rules on Electronic Evidence]
How proven:
(1) By the testimony of a person who was a party to
the same;
(2) By the testimony of a person who has personal
knowledge thereof; or
(3) In the absence or unavailability of such
witnesses, by other competent evidence [Sec. 2,
Rule 11, Rules on Electronic Evidence]
When recorded, the communication ceases to be
ephemeral and shall be proven in the same manner
as proving audio, photographic and video evidence
[Sec. 2, Rule 11, Rules on Electronic Evidence].
VIEW OF AN OBJECT OR SCENE
When an object is relevant to the fact in issue, it may
be viewed by the court. [Sec. 1, Rule 130]
Court has an inherent power to order view when
there is a need to do so. [Riano, citing Sec. 1, Rule 130]
Inspection may be made inside or outside the
courtroom. An inspection outside should be made in
the presence of the parties or at least with the
previous notice to them. [Riano, citing Moran]
CHAIN OF CUSTODY
In relation to Sec. 21 of the Comprehensive
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002
MEANING OF CHAIN OF CUSTODY
A method of authenticating evidence which requires
that the admission of an exhibit be preceded by
evidence sufficient to support a finding that the
matter in question is what the proponent claims it to
be [Lopez v People (2008), as cited in People v Dela
Cruz (2008) and People v Agulay (2008)]
IN RELATION TO DRUG CASES
The apprehending team having initial custody and
control of the drugs shall:
(1) Physically inventory, and
(2) Photograph the same,
(3) In the presence of
PAGE 220
EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION
(a) Accused or the person/s from whom the drugs
were seized, or his/her representative or
counsel
(b) Representative from the media and the
Department of Justice
(c) Any elected public official
(4) Who shall be required to sign the copies of the
inventory and be given a copy thereof. [Sec. 21,
Art. II, R.A. 9165 or the Comprehensive Dangerous
Drugs Act of 2002]
Non-compliance with Sec. 21 of R.A. 9165,
particularly the making of the inventory and their
photographing of the drugs confiscated will not
render the drugs inadmissible in evidence. The issue
if there is non-compliance with the law is not
admissibility, but of weight – evidentiary merit or
probative value. [People v Del Monte (2008)]
PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHING CHAIN OF CUSTODY
To guaranty the integrity of the physical evidence
and to prevent the introduction of evidence which is
not authentic. [Riano]
Note: A unique characteristic of narcotic substances
is that they are not readily identifiable. Hence, in
authenticating the same, a more stringent standard
than that applied to readily identifiable objects is
necessary. This exacting standard entails a chain of
custody of the item with sufficient completeness to
render it improbable for the original item to be
exchanged with another, contaminated or tampered
with [Lopez v. People (2008)]
RULE ON DNA EVIDENCE
[A.M. No. 06-11-5-SC]
MEANING OF DNA
The totality of the DNA profiles, results and other
genetic information directly generated from DNA
testing of biological samples. [Sec. 3c]
APPLICATION FOR DNA TESTING ORDER
With prior court order
(1) The appropriate court may, at any time, either (i)
motu proprio or (ii) on application of any person
who has a legal interest in the matter in litigation,
order a DNA testing.
(2) Such order shall issue after due hearing and
notice to the parties upon a showing of the
following:
(a) A biological sample exists that is relevant to
the case;
(b) The biological sample: (i) was not previously
subjected to the type of DNA testing now
requested; or (ii) was previously subjected to
UP COLLEGE OF LAW
DNA testing, but the results may require
confirmation for good reasons;
(c) The DNA testing uses a scientifically valid
technique;
(d) The DNA testing has the scientific potential to
produce new information that is relevant to
the proper resolution of the case; and
(e) The existence of other factors, if any, which
the court may consider as potentially affecting
the accuracy of integrity of the DNA testing.
[Sec. 4]
Without prior court order
This Rule shall not preclude a DNA testing, without
need of a prior court order, at the behest of any
party. [Sec. 4]
POST-CONVICTION DNA TESTING
How obtained:
(1) Without need of prior court order
(2) Available to the prosecution or any person
convicted by final and executory judgment
Requisites:
(1) A biological sample exists
(2) Such sample is relevant to the case
(3) The testing would probably result in the reversal
or modification of the judgment of conviction.
[Sec. 6]
Remedy if Results Favorable to the Convict
Convict or the prosecution may file a petition for a
writ of habeas corpus in the court of origin, CA or SC
or any member of said courts. [Sec. 10]
General Rule: If the court, after due hearing, finds the
petition meritorious, it shall reverse or modify the
judgment of conviction and order the release of the
convict. [Sec. 10]
Exception: If continued detention is justified for a
lawful cause. [Sec. 10]
ASSESSMENT AND PROBATIVE VALUE OF DNA EVIDENCE
AND ADMISSIBILITY
Factors in assessing the probative value of DNA
evidence
(1) Chain of custody
(a) How the biological samples were collected
(b) How they were handled
(c) Possibility of contamination
(2) DNA testing methodology
(a) Procedure followed in analyzing the samples
(b) Advantages and disadvantages of the
procedure
PAGE 221
EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION
(c) Compliance with scientifically valid
standards in conducting the tests
(3) Forensic DNA laboratory
(a) Accreditation by any reputable standards-
setting institution
(b) Qualification of the analyst who conducted
the tests
(c) If not accredited, relevant experience of the
laboratory in forensic work and its credibility
(4) Reliability of the testing result [Sec. 7]
Vallejo Standard
In assessing the probative value of DNA evidence,
courts should consider the following:
(a) How the samples were collected
(b) How they were handled
(c) The possibility of contamination of the samples
(d) The procedure followed in analyzing the samples,
whether the proper standards and procedures
were followed
(e) Qualification of the analyst who conducted the
tests [People v. Vallejo (2002)]
RULES ON EVALUATION OF RELIABILITY OF THE DNA
TESTING METHODOLOGY
Factors that determine the reliability of the DNA
Testing Methodology
(1) Falsifiability of the principles or methods used
(2) Subject to peer review and publication of the
principles or methods
(3) General acceptance of the principles or methods
by the scientific community
(4) Existence and maintenance of standards and
controls to ensure the correctness of data
generated
(5) Existence of an appropriate reference
population database
(6) General degree of confidence attributed to
mathematical calculations used in comparing
DNA profiles
(7) Significance and limitation of statistical
calculations used in comparing DNA profiles
Documentary Evidence
MEANING OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
Consist of writings or any material containing letters,
words, numbers, figures, symbols or other modes of
written expressions offered as proof of their contents
[Rule 130, Sec. 2]
UP COLLEGE OF LAW
To be deemed documentary evidence, such writings
or materials must be offered as proof of their
contents. If offered for some other purpose, they
constitute OBJECT EVIDENCE.
REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY
(1) Relevant
(2) Competent
(a) Document be Authenticated
(b) Authenticated by Competent Witness
(3) Formally Offered in Evidence
BEST EVIDENCE RULE
MEANING OF THE RULE
When the subject of inquiry is the contents of a
document, no evidence shall be admissible other
than the original document itself. [Rule 130, Sec. 3]
APPLICABILITY
Only when the subject of inquiry is the contents of a
document [Rule 130, Sec. 3]
The BER does not apply when the issue is only as to
WON such document was actually executed or in the
circumstances relevant to its execution. [People v
Tandoy (1990)]
As applied in the case of affidavits and depositions:
Affidavits and depositions are considered as not
being the best evidence, hence not admissible if the
affiants or deponents are available as witnesses.
[Regalado citing 4 Martin, op cit., p. 82]
MEANING OF “ORIGINAL DOCUMENT”
(1) One the contents of which are the subject of
inquiry
(2) All such copies executed at or about the same
time, and with identical contents
Note: Carbon copies are deemed duplicate
originals. [People v Tan (1959)]
(3) All such entries made and repeated in the regular
course of business, at/near the time of the
transaction [Rule 130, Sec. 4]
REQUISITES FOR INTRODUCTION OF SECONDARY EVIDENCE
(EXCEPTIONS TO BER)
(1) When the original has been lost or destroyed, or
cannot be produced in court, without bad faith on
the offeror’s part
Proponent must prove due execution, loss,
destruction or unavailability of the original
(Rule 130, Sec. 5) and reasonable diligence and
good faith in the search for/attempt to produce
the original [Tan v. CA (1985)]
PAGE 222
EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION
ALL duplicates or counterparts must be
accounted for before using copies [De Vera v.
Aguilar (1993)]
How to prove contents:
(a) Copy,
(b) Recital of its contents in some authentic
document, or
(c) Testimony of witnesses (in the order stated)
[Section 5, Rule 130]
How to prove loss/destruction: Through the
testimony of:
(a) The person or persons who executed it;
(b) The person before whom its execution was
acknowledged; or
(c) Any person who was present and saw it
executed and delivered, or who, after its
execution and delivery, saw it and recognized
the signatures, or by a person to whom the
parties to the instruments had previously
confessed the execution thereof. [Director of
Lands v. CA (1971)]
(2) When the original is in the custody or under the
control of the party against whom it is offered,
and the latter fails to produce it after reasonable
notice
(3) When the original consists of numerous accounts
or other documents which cannot be examined in
court without great loss of time, and the fact
sought to be established from them is only the
general result of the whole
(4) When the original is a public record in the custody
of a public officer or is recorded in a public office
(5) When the original is outside the jurisdiction of the
court, secondary evidence is admissible [PNB v.
Olila (98 Phil 1002)]
RULES ON ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE
[A.M. NO. 01-7-01- SC]
APPLICABILITY
The Rules on Electronic Evidence applies only to civil
actions, quasi-judicial proceedings and
administrative proceeding, not to criminal action.
[Ang v. CA (2010)]
MEANING OF ELECTRONIC DEVICE; ELECTRONIC DATA
MESSAGE
Electronic document
(1) Information or the representation of information,
data, figures, symbols or other modes of written
expression,
(2) Described or however represented, by which a
right is established or an obligation extinguished,
or by which a fact may be proved and affirmed,
UP COLLEGE OF LAW
(3) Which is received, recorded, transmitted, stored
processed, retrieved or produced electronically.
(4) It includes digitally signed documents and any
print-out or output, readable by sight or other
means, which accurately reflects the electronic
data message or electronic document.
For purposes of these Rules, the term “electronic
document” may be used interchangeably with
electronic data message”.
Electronic data message
Information generated, sent, received or stored by
electronic, optical or similar means
PROBATIVE VALUE OF ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS OR
EVIDENTIARY WEIGHT; METHOD OF PROOF
Factors in assessing evidentiary weight of electronic
evidence [Rule 7, Sec. 1]
In assessing the evidentiary weight of an electronic
document, the following factors may be considered:
(1) The reliability of the manner or method in which it
was generated, stored or communicated,
including but not limited to
(a) Input and output procedures,
(b) Controls, tests and checks for accuracy and
reliability of the electronic data message or
document,
(c) In the light of all the circumstances as well as
any relevant agreement;
(2) The reliability of the manner in which its
originator was identified;
(3) The integrity of the information and
communication system in which it is recorded or
stored, including but not limited to the hardware
and computer programs or software used as well
as programming errors;
(a) Whether the information and communication
system or other similar device was operated in
a manner that did not affect the integrity of
the electronic document, and there are no
other reasonable grounds to doubt the
integrity of the information and
communication system [Rule 7, Sec. 2];
(b) Whether the electronic document was
recorded or stored by a party to the
proceedings with interest adverse to that of
the party using it [Rule 7, Sec. 2]; or
(c) Whether the electronic document was
recorded or stored in the usual and ordinary
course of business by a person who is not a
party to the proceedings and who did not act
under the control of the party using it [Rule 7,
Sec. 2]
(4) The familiarity of the witness or the person who
made the entry with the communication and
information system;
PAGE 223
EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION
(5) The nature and quality of the information which
went into the communication and information
system upon which the electronic data message
or electronic document was based; or
(6) Other factors which the court may consider as
affecting the accuracy or integrity of the
electronic document or electronic data message.
In any dispute involving the integrity of the
information and communication system in which an
electronic document or electronic data message is
recorded or stored, the court may consider, among
others, the following factors:
(1) Whether the information and communication
system or other similar device was operated in a
manner that did not affect the integrity of the
electronic document, and there are no other
reasonable grounds to doubt the integrity of the
information and communication system;
(2) Whether the electronic document was recorded
or stored by a party to the proceedings with
interest adverse to that of the party using it; or
(3) Whether the electronic document was recorded
or stored in the usual and ordinary course of
business by a person who is not a party to the
proceedings and who did not act under the
control of the party using it.
Text messages have been classified as “ephemeral
electronic communication” under Section 1(k), Rule 2
of the Rules on Electronic Evidence, and “shall be
proven by the testimony of a person who was a party
to the same or has personal knowledge thereof.”
[Vidallon-Magtolis v. Salud (2005)]
Method of Proof
(1) Affidavit of Evidence [Rule 9, Sec. 1]
(a) Must state facts:
(i) Of direct personal knowledge, or
(j) Based on authentic records
(b) Must affirmatively show the competence of
the affiant to testify on the matters contained
in the affidavit
(2) Cross-Examination of Deponent [Rule 9, Sec. 2]
(a) Affiant shall affirm the contents of the
affidavit in open court.
(b) Affiant may be cross-examined as a matter of
right by the adverse party.
AUTHENTICATION OF ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS &
ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES
[Rule 5, secs. 1 to 3; Rule 11, secs. 1 to 2, Rules on
electronic evidence]
Of Electronic Documents
Burden of proving authenticity: The person seeking
to introduce the electronic document [Rule 5, Sec. 1]
UP COLLEGE OF LAW
Manner of Authentication:
(1) By evidence that it had been digitally signed by
the person purported to have signed the same;
(2) By evidence that other appropriate security
procedures or devices as may be authorized by
the Supreme Court or by law for authentication of
electronic documents were applied to the
document; or
(3) By other evidence showing its integrity and
reliability to the satisfaction of the judge. [Rule 5,
Sec. 2]
Of Electronic Signatures [Rule 6, Sec. 2]
(1) By evidence that a method or process was utilized
to establish a digital signature and verify the
same;
(2) By any other means provided by law; or
(3) By any other means satisfactory to the judge
ELECTRONIC DOCUMENTS & THE HEARSAY RULE
Business Records as Exception to the Hearsay Rule
What Constitute Business Records: Records of any
business, institution, association, profession,
occupation, and calling of every kind, whether or not
conducted for profit, or for legitimate purposes [Rule
2, Sec. 1b]
Requisites
(1) Made by electronic, optical or other similar means
(2) Made at or near the time of or from transmission
or supply of information
(3) Made by a person with knowledge thereof
(4) Kept in the regular course or conduct of a
business activity,
(5) Such was the regular practice to make the
memorandum, report, record, or data compilation
by electronic, optical or similar means
(6) Abovementioned facts shown by the testimony of
the custodian or other qualified witnesses [Rule 8,
Sec. 1]
Exception to the Exception
(1) Untrustworthiness of the source of information
(2) Untrustworthiness of the method of the
preparation, transmission or storage thereof
(3) Untrustworthiness of the circumstances of the
preparation, transmission or storage thereof [Rule
8, Sec. 2]
AUDIO, PHOTOGRAPHIC, VIDEO & EPHEMERAL EVIDENCE
If the foregoing communications are recorded or
embodied in an electronic document, then the
provisions of Rule 5 (“Authentication of Electronic
Documents”) shall apply.
PAGE 224
EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION
PAROL EVIDENCE
MEANING OF PAROL EVIDENCE
Any evidence aliunde, whether oral or written, which
is intended or tends to vary or contradict a complete
and enforceable agreement embodied in a
document. [Regalado]
APPLICATION OF THE PAROL EVIDENCE RULE
General Rule
When the terms of an agreement (including wills)
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. [Rule 130, Sec. 9]
Exception
It does not apply when 3rd parties are involved.
[Lechugas v. CA (1986)]
WHEN PAROL EVIDENCE CAN BE INTRODUCED
(1) When a party presents parol evidence to modify,
explain or add to the terms of a written
agreement
(2) Ground/s for presenting parol evidence is put in
issue in the pleading
Grounds for presenting parol evidence:
(1) An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in
the written agreement
(a) Intrinsic ambiguity – writing admits of two
constructions both of which are in harmony
with the language used
Note: If ambiguity is intermediate (both latent
and patent), parol evidence is admissible
[Regalado citing 20 Am. Jur 1011]
(b) Mistake refers to mistake of fact which is
mutual to the parties [BPI v. Fidelity and
Surety, Co, 1927]
(c) Imperfection – includes inaccurate statement
in the agreement or incompleteness in the
writing or the presence of inconsistent
provisions [Regalado]
(2) Failure of the written agreement to express the
true intent and agreement of the parties thereto
Purpose: To enable court to ascertain the true
intention of the parties [Tolentino v. Gonzales Sy
Chiam (1927)]
(3) Validity of the written agreement—Parol Evidence
may be admitted to show:
(a) True consideration of a contract
(b) Want/Illegality of consideration
(c) Incapacity of parties
(d) Fictitious/simulated contract
(e) Fraud in inducement [Regalado]
UP COLLEGE OF LAW EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION

(4) Existence of other terms agreed to by the parties Private Public

or their successors in interest after the execution
of the written agreement. and authenticity must be execution and
proved authenticity
Collateral agreements
General Rule: Parol evidence rules apply Private documents
Exceptions: General Rule: When offered as authentic,
(a) Collateral agreement is not inconsistent with the authentication is necessary
terms of the written contract
(b) Collateral agreement has not been integrated in How to Prove Due Execution and Authenticity
and is independent of the written contract (1) By anyone who saw the document executed or
(c) Collateral agreement is subsequent to and written; OR
novatory of the written contract (2) By evidence of the genuineness of the signature
(d) Collateral agreement constitutes a condition or handwriting of the maker [Rule 132, Sec. 20]
precedent which determines whether the written
contract may become operative or effective (does Additional Modes of Authentication under American
not apply to conditions subsequent not stated in Jurisprudence [Regalado]
the agreement) [Regalado] (1) Doctrine of Self-Authentication
Where the facts in writing could only have been
DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN BEST EVIDENCE RULE & PAROL known by the writer
EVIDENCE RULE (2) Rule of Authentication by Adverse Party
Best evidence rule Parol evidence rule Where the reply of the adverse party refers to and
affirms the transmittal to him and his receipt of the
Contemplates situation Presupposes that the letter in question, a copy of which the proponent is
wherein original writing is original document is offering as evidence
not available and/or available in court
there is a dispute as to When evidence of authenticity of a private writing is not
whether said writing is required
the original (1) Ancient Documents – Authentication NOT
Prohibits introduction of Prohibits the varying of necessary provided that private document be:
substitutionary evidence the terms of a written (a) More than 30 years old;
in lieu of original agreement (b) Produced from the custody in which it would
document regardless of naturally be found if genuine; and
whether it varies the (c) Unblemished by any alterations or
contents of the original circumstances of suspicion. [Rule 132, Sec. 21]
Note: Other instances when authentication is not
Applies to all kinds of Applies only to required:
documents documents contractual in (a) Writing is a public document/record [Rule 132,
nature (Exception: Wills) Sec. 19]
Can be invoked by any Can be invoked only (b) Notarial document acknowledged,
party to an action when the controversy is proved/certified [Rule 132, Sec. 30]
regardless of whether or between the parties to (c) When authenticity and due execution has
not such party the written agreement, been admitted [See Rule 8, Sec. 8]
participated in the writing their privies or any party (d) That which it is claimed to be: Authentication
involved directly affected thereby not necessary [Rule 132, Sec. 20]

AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF DOCUMENTS How to prove genuineness of handwriting

MEANING OF AUTHENTICATION
Preliminary step in showing the admissibility of
evidence
PUBLIC AND PRIVATE DOCUMENTS
Private
When offered as
authentic, due execution
(1) By any witness who believes it to be the
handwriting of such person because:
(a) He has seen the person write;
(b) He has seen writing purporting to be his upon
which the witness has acted or been charged,
and has thus acquired knowledge of the
Public handwriting of such person [Rule 132, Sec. 22]
(2) A comparison by the witness or the court of the
Admissible without
questioned handwriting, and admitted genuine
further proof of its due
specimens thereof or proved to be genuine to the

PAGE 225
UP COLLEGE OF LAW
satisfaction of the judge [Rule 132, Sec. 22]
(3) Expert evidence [Rule 130, Sec. 49]
Public documents
Kinds of public documents
(1) Written official acts or records of the official acts
of the sovereign authority, official bodies and
tribunals, and public officers, whether of the
Philippines or of a foreign country
(2) Public records, kept in the Philippines, of private
documents required by law to be entered therein
(3) Notarial documents (except last wills and
testaments) [Rule 132, Sec. 19]
Proof of public documents
Records of Official Acts [Rule 132, Sec. 24]
(1) By an official publication thereof; or
(2) By an attested copy of the document
Note: Documents without documentary stamp
affixed thereto, unless specifically exempted by law,
may not be admitted or used in evidence in any court
until the requisite stamp shall have been affixed.
[Sec. 201, NIRC] Also, there is a presumption that the
requisite stamps have been affixed in the original
copy when only the carbon copies of the same are
available. [Mahilum v CA (1966)]
ATTESTATION OF A COPY
[RULE 132, SEC. 25]
(1) Must be made by the officer having the legal
custody of the record, or by his deputy
(2) Must state that the copy is a correct copy of the
original or a specific part thereof, as the case may
be
(3) Must be under the official seal of the attesting
officer, if there be any, or if he be the clerk of a
court having a seal, under the seal of such court
If the record is not kept in the Philippines, attested
copy must be accompanied with a certificate, which
(1) May be made by a secretary of the
embassy/legation, consul-general, consul, vice-
consul, consular agent or any officer in the
foreign service of the Philippines stationed in the
foreign country in which the record is kept;
(2) Must state that such officer has the custody; and
(3) Must be authenticated by the seal of his office.
PROOF OF LACK OF RECORD
[RULE 132, SEC. 28]
(1) Written statement
(a) Signed by an officer having the custody of an
official record or by his deputy
(b) Must state that after diligent search, no record
or entry of a specified tenor is found to exist in
the records of his office
PAGE 226
EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION
(2) Certificate
(a) Accompanying the written statement
(b) Must state that that such officer has the
custody
WHAT TO ESTABLISH TO IMPEACH JUDICIAL RECORD
[RULE 132, SEC. 29]
(1) Want of jurisdiction in the court or judicial officer;
(2) Collusion between the parties; OR
(3) Fraud in the party offering the record, with
respect to the proceedings
PROOF OF NOTARIAL DOCUMENTS
Notarial Documents (except last wills and
testaments) [Rule 132, Sec. 30]
(1) May be presented in evidence without further
proof, the certificate of acknowledgment being
prima facie evidence of the execution of the
instrument or document involved.
(2) Such notarized documents are evidence, even
against 3rd persons, of the facts which gave rise
to their execution and of the date of execution.
[Rule 132, Sec. 23]
ALTERATIONS IN A DOCUMENT
[RULE 132, SEC. 3]
Requisites
(1) Document is being presented as genuine;
(2) Document has been altered and appears to have
been altered;
(3) Alteration was made after execution of the
document; and
(4) Alteration is in a part material to the question in
dispute
What to Show about the Alteration
(1) Was made by another, without his concurrence;
(2) Was made with the consent of the parties
affected by it;
(3) Was otherwise properly or innocently made; or
(4) Did not change the meaning or language of the
instrument.
Whose Burden of Proof
Party producing the document must account for the
alteration. Failure to do so would result in the
inadmissibility of evidence.
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN AN UNOFFICIAL LANGUAGE
[RULE 132, SEC. 33]
NOT admissible unless accompanied by a translation
into English or Filipino.
Parties or their attorneys are directed to have the
translation prepared before trial.
UP COLLEGE OF LAW EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION

Effect if Witness Has Interest in the Subject Matter

Testimonial Evidence A person is not disqualified (except if covered by the
Dead Man’s statute). The effect is only on credibility,
but not competency.
WITH RESPECT TO A WITNESS
Relationship
QUALIFICATIONS OF A WITNESS Mere relationship does not impair credibility. To
[RULE 130, SEC. 20] warrant rejection, it must be clearly shown:
All persons who can perceive, and, perceiving, can (1) Testimony was inherently improbable or defective
make their known perception to others, may be (2) Improper/evil motives had moved the witness to
witnesses. incriminate falsely
Religious/political belief, interest in the outcome of BY REASON OF MENTAL INCAPACITY OR IMMATURITY
the case, or conviction of a crime unless otherwise Mental Incapacity [Rule 130, Sec. 21a]
provided by law, shall not be ground for Requisites:
disqualification. (1) Person must be incapable of intelligently making
known his perception to others
WHEN DETERMINED (2) His incapability must exist at the time of his
At the time the said witness are produced for production for examination
examination/at the taking of their depositions
A mental retardate is not for this reason alone
Note: With respect to children of tender years, disqualified from being a witness. Acceptance of his
competence at the time of the occurrence is also testimony depends on its nature and credibility or,
taken into account. otherwise put, the quality of his perceptions and the
manner he can make them known to the court.
IN CASE PERSON IS CONVICTED OF A CRIME [People v. Salomon (1993)]
General Rule: Not disqualified
Exceptions: If the person is convicted of: Immaturity [Rule 130, Sec. 21b]
(a) Falsification of documents, Requisites:
(b) Perjury, or (1) Mental maturity of the witness (child) must
(c) False testimony render him incapable of perceiving the facts
respecting which he is examined.
COMPETENCY VS. CREDIBILITY OF A WITNESS (2) He is incapable of relating his perception
Competency Credibility truthfully.

A matter of law and of Has nothing to do with Incapacity must occur at the time the witness
rules the law or rules perceives the event.
Refers to the basic Refers to the weight and
qualifications of a witness trustworthiness or Unsound mind
as his capacity to perceive reliability of the testimony (a) Includes any mental aberration
and his capacity to (organic/functional), induced by drugs/hypnosis
communicate his (b) Not disqualified as long as the witness can
perception to others convey ideas by words/signs

Deaf-Mutes
DISQUALIFICATIONS OF A WITNESS Not disqualified when they can understand and
(1) Disqualification by reason of mental incapacity or appreciate sanctity of oath, can comprehend facts
immaturity; that they are going to testify to and communicate
(2) Disqualification by reason of marriage; through a qualified interpreter
(3) Disqualification by reason of death or insanity of
adverse party; Child Witness
(4) Disqualification by reason of privileged Must have capacity for observation, recollection and
communication; communication
(5) Disqualification by reason of parental and filial
privilege BY REASON OF MARRIAGE
Also known as “Marital Disqualification Rule” or
“Spousal Immunity”

PAGE 227
UP COLLEGE OF LAW
Requisites
(1) Marriage is valid and existing as of the time of the
offer of testimony.
(2) Other spouse is a party to the action.
Exceptions [Rule 130, Sec. 22]
Spouse MAY testify for or against the other even
without the consent of the latter:
(1) In a civil case by one against the other
(2) In a criminal case for a crime committed by one
against the other or the latter's direct
descendants/ascendants.
Rationale [Alvarez v. Ramirez (2005)]
(1) There is identity of interests between husband
and wife;
(2) If one were to testify for or against the other,
there is a consequent danger of perjury;
(3) Policy of the law is to guard the security and
confidence of private life, and to prevent domestic
disunion and unhappiness; and
(4) Where there is want of domestic tranquility, there
is danger of punishing one spouse through the
hostile testimony of the other.
If the husband imputed the conviction to the wife,
then marital disqualification is waived.
If the spouse is a co-accused, he/she cannot be
called as an adverse party witness under this Rule.
BY REASON OF DEATH OR INSANITY OF ADVERSE PARTY
Also known as “Dead Man’s Statute” or “Survivorship
Rule”
Requisites [Rule 130, Sec. 23]
(1) Defendant is the executor or administrator or a
representative of the deceased or of the person of
unsound mind;
(2) Suit is upon a claim by the plaintiff against the
estate of said deceased or person of unsound
mind;
(3) Witness is the plaintiff, or an assignor of that
party, or a person in whose behalf the case is
prosecuted; and
(4) Subject of the testimony is as to any matter of
fact occurring before the death of such deceased
person or before such person became of unsound
mind.
When the Dead Man’s Statute Is Inapplicable
(1) The survivor may testify against the estate of the
deceased where the latter was guilty of fraud
which fraud was established by evidence other
than the testimony of the survivor. [Ong Chua v.
Carr (1929)]
PAGE 228
EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION
(2) He may also testify where he was the one sued by
the decedent’s estate since the action then is not
against the estate. [Tongco v. Vianzon (1927)]
(3) He may likewise testify where the estate had filed
a counterclaim against him or where the estate
cross-examined him as to matters occurring
during the lifetime of the deceased. [Goñi v. CA
(1986)]
(4) No application to a mere witness
(5) No application to nominal parties, officers and
stockholders against corporations
(6) Cannot be used in a negative testimony
(7) If the testimony is offered to prove a claim less
than what is written
(8) If the defendant did not object
(9) When there is an existence of fraud
(10) When the party cross-examines the witness
Rationale
To discourage perjury and protect the estate from
fictitious claims
Note: On applicability—The DMS is still applicable
even if the property has already been judicially
adjudicated to the heirs regardless whether the
deceased died before or after the suit.
PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATIONS
(1) Husband and wife (marital privilege) [Rule 130,
Sec. 24a]
(2) Attorney and client [Sec. 24(b), Rule 130]
(3) Physician and patient [Sec. 24(c), Rule 130]
(4) Priest and penitent [Sec. 24(d), Rule 130]
(5) Other privileged communication not in the ROC
(a) Newsman’s privilege
(b) Information in conciliation proceedings
(c) Data Privacy Act
(6) Parental and filial privilege rule [Sec. 25, Rule 130]
Husband and wife
Rationale
Confidential nature of the privilege; to preserve
marital and domestic relations
Requisites
(1) There must be a valid marriage between the
husband and wife;
(2) There is a communication received in confidence
by one from the other; and
(3) The confidential communication was received
during the marriage.
A widow of a victim allegedly murdered may testify
as to her husband’s dying declaration as to how he
died the since the same was not intended to be
confidential. [US v. Antipolo (1918)]
UP COLLEGE OF LAW EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION

(4) When the communication was intended for an

When Not Applicable
(1) When the communication was not intended to be
kept in confidence
(2) When the communication was made prior to the
marriage
(3) When the communication was overheard/comes
into the hands of a third party whether legally or
not
(4) Waiver of the privilege
(5) In a civil case by one against the other
(6) In a criminal case for a crime committed by one
against the other or the latter's direct
descendants/ascendants.
unlawful purpose
(5) When the communication was received from third
persons not acting in behalf/as agents of clients
(6) When the communication was made in the
presence of third parties stranger to the attorney-
client relationship
(7) When the communication has something to do
with a client’s contemplated criminal act [People
v. Sandiganbayan (1997)] [Regalado]
General Rule: The attorney-client privilege may not
be invoked to refuse to divulge the identity of the
client.

In Contrast to Marital Disqualification Exceptions [Regala v. Sandiganbayan (1996)]:

Marital Disqualification Marital Privilege (1) When a strong probability exists that revealing
the name would implicate that person in the very
One spouse should be a Neither of the spouses same activity for which he sought the lawyer’s
party to the case; needs to be a party; advice;
(2) When disclosure would open the client to liability;
Applies only if the Does not cease even after
(3) When the name would furnish the only link that
marriage is existing at the the marriage is dissolved;
would form the chain of testimony necessary to
time the testimony is and
convict.
offered; and
Constitutes a total Prohibition is limited to Physician and patient
prohibition on any testimony on confidential Requisites
testimony for or against communications between (1) Physician is authorized to practice medicine,
the spouse of the witness. spouses. surgery or obstetrics;
(2) Information was acquired or the advice or
Attorney and client treatment was given by him in his professional
Requisites capacity for the purpose of treating and curing
(1) There must be a communication made by the the patient;
client to the attorney or an advice given by the (3) Information, advice or treatment, if revealed,
attorney to his client; would blacken the reputation of the patient; and
(2) The communication must have been given in (4) Privilege is invoked in a civil case, whether or not
confidence; and the patient is a party thereto.
(3) The communication or advice must have been
given either in the course of the professional Where Applicable:
employment or with a view to professional (a) All forms of communication, advice or treatment
employment. (b) Information acquired by the physician from his
personal observations and examination of the
Attorney’s secretary, stenographer, or clerk are also patient
covered by the rule and cannot be examined
concerning any fact the knowledge of which has Physician-patient relationship need not be entered
been acquired in such capacity without the consent into voluntarily.
of the client AND their employer.
When Not Applicable:
When Not Applicable (a) Communication was not given in confidence
(1) When the communication made was not for the (b) Communication was irrelevant to the professional
purpose of creating relationship (even if employment
afterwards he become counsel) (c) Communication was made for an unlawful
(2) When the communication was intended to be purpose
made public (d) Communication was intended for the
(3) When the communication was intended to be commission/concealment of a crime
communicated to others (e) Communication was intended to be made
public/divulged in court

PAGE 229
UP COLLEGE OF LAW
(f) When there was a waiver
(g) When the doctor was presented as an expert
witness and only hypothetical problems were
presented to him. [Lim v. CA (1992)]
Priest and penitent
Requisites
(1) Confession was made to, or advice given by him
pursuant to a religious duty enjoined in the
course of discipline of the sect or denomination of
the priest.
(2) Confession or advice was confidential and
penitential in character.
Public officers
Requisites
(1) Communication was made to the public officer in
official confidence; and
(2) Public interest would suffer by the disclosure of
such communication.
Elements of “presidential communications privilege”
(1) Must relate to a “quintessential and non-
delegable presidential power;”
(2) Must be authored or “solicited and received” by a
close advisor of the President or the President
himself; and
(3) Privilege may be overcome by a showing of
adequate need such that the information sought
“likely contains important evidence” and by the
unavailability of the information elsewhere. [Neri
v. Senate (2008)]
Other Privileged Communication not in the ROC:
Newsman’s Privilege [RA 53, as amended by RA 1477]
General Rule: Publisher, editor or duly accredited
reporter cannot be compelled to reveal the source of
any news report or information related in confidence
Exception: Court/House/Committee in Congress
finds that such revelation is demanded by security of
the State
Information in Conciliation Proceedings
All information and statements made at conciliaton
proceedings shall be treated as privileged
communications. [Art. 233, Labor Code]
Data Privacy Act
Personal information controllers may invoke the
principle of privileged communication over privileged
information that they lawfully control or process.
Subject to existing laws and regulations, any
evidence gathered on privileged information is
inadmissible. [Sec. 15, RA 10173]
PAGE 230
EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION
Parental and filial privilege rule
General Rule: A person cannot be compelled to
testify against his parents (parental privilege), other
direct ascendants, children or other direct
descendants (filial privilege).
Exception [Art. 215, Family Code]: Descendant may be
compelled to give his testimony:
(1) In a criminal case; and
(2) When such testimony is indispensable in a crime
committed against said descendant; or
(3) In a crime committed by one parent against the
other.
EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES
RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF A WITNESS
[RULE 132, SEC. 3]
Obligation of a witness
To answer questions, although his answer may tend
to establish a claim against him.
Rights of a witness
(1) To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or
insulting questions, and from harsh or insulting
demeanor
(2) Not to be detained longer than the interests of
justice require
(3) Not to be examined except only as to matters
pertinent to the issue
(4) Not to give an answer which will tend to subject
him to a penalty for an offense unless otherwise
provided by law, e.g., Sec. 8, RA 1379 and other
immunity statutes which grant the witness
immunity from criminal prosecution for offenses
admitted
(5) Not to give an answer which will tend to degrade
his reputation, unless it to be the very fact at issue
or to a fact from which the fact in issue would be
presumed. But a witness must answer to the fact
of his previous final conviction for an offense.
One-Day Examination of Witness Rule
[AM 03-1-09-SC] [2009 BAR]
A witness has to be fully examined in one (1) day
only. It shall be strictly adhered to subject to the
courts' discretion during trial on whether or not to
extend the direct and/or cross-examination for
justifiable reasons.
ORDER IN THE EXAMINATION OF AN INDIVIDUAL WITNESS
[RULE 132, SEC. 4]
(1) Direct examination
(2) Cross examination
(3) Re-direct examination
(4) Re-cross examination
UP COLLEGE OF LAW
Direct Examination [Rule 132, Sec. 4]
Who conducts: Proponent
Why conducted: Examination-in-chief of a witness
by the party presenting him, on the facts
relevant to the issue.
Cross Examination [Rule 132, Sec. 6]
Who conducts: Opponent
When conducted: Upon the termination of the
direct examination
Why conducted: To test the witness’s accuracy
and truthfulness, and freedom from interest
or bias, or the reverse, and to elicit all
important facts bearing upon the issue
What matters are covered: Any matters stated in
the direct examination, or connected
therewith
Re-Direct Examination [Rule 132, Sec. 7]
Who conducts: Proponent
When conducted: After cross-examination of the
witness
Why conducted: To explain or supplement his
answers given during the cross-examination
What matters are covered: Those stated in the
cross-examination, and matters not dealt with,
if allowed by the Court
Re-Direct Examination [Rule 132, Sec. 7]
Who conducts: Opponent
When conducted: Upon the conclusion of the re-
direct examination
What matters are covered: Those stated in his re-
direct examination, and also on such other
matters as may be allowed by the court in its
discretion.
Recalling the Witness [Rule 132, Sec. 9]
Who conducts: Either party
When conducted: After both sides have
concluded the examination of a witness, and
with leave of court
Why conducted:
(1) Particularly identified material points were
not covered in cross-examination
(2) Particularly described vital documents were
not presented to the witness
(3) Cross-examination was conducted in so inept
a manner as to result in a virtual absence
thereof [People v. Rivera (1991)]
PAGE 231
EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION
LEADING AND MISLEADING QUESTIONS
[RULE 132, SEC. 10]
Questions not allowed
(1) Misleading Questions [Sec. 10, Rule 132]
(a) Questions that assume as true a fact not yet
testified to by the witness, or contrary to that
which he has previously stated.
(b) NEVER allowed
(2) Leading Questions
Questions that suggest to the witness the answer,
which the examining party desires.
General Rule: Leading questions are not allowed.
Exceptions:
(1) On cross examination;
(2) On preliminary matters;
(3) When there is a difficulty is getting direct and
intelligible answers from a witness who is
ignorant, or a child of tender years, or is of feeble
mind, or a deaf-mute;
(4) On an unwilling or hostile witness;
A witness may be considered hostile only when
declared by the court, upon adequate showing
of his: [Sec. 12, Rule 132]
(a) Adverse interest;
(b) Unjustified reluctance to testify;
(c) His having misled the party into calling him
to the witness stand.
(5) On a witness who is an adverse party or an
officer/director or managing agent of a
public/private corporation or of a
partnership/association which is an adverse
party.
METHODS OF IMPEACHMENT OF ADVERSE PARTY’S
WITNESS
[RULE 132, SEC. 11]
(1) By contradictory evidence;
(2) By evidence that his general reputation for truth,
honesty or integrity is bad;
(3) By evidence that he has made at other times
statements inconsistent with his present
testimony.
How the Witness Is Impeached by Evidence of
Inconsistent Statements (Laying the Predicate)
Elements
(1) The alleged statements must be related to the
witness including the circumstances of the times
and places and the persons present. If the
statements are in writing they must be shown to
him.
UP COLLEGE OF LAW
(2) Witness may be asked whether he made such
statements and also to explain them if he admits
making those statements.
Purpose
To allow the witness to admit or deny the prior
statement and afford him an opportunity to explain
the same.
Evidence of the good character of a witness
Evidence of the witness’ good character is not
admissible until such character has been impeached
[Sec. 14, Rule 132]
JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT RULE
[AM 12-8-8-SC]
Scope [Sec. 1]
Applies to all actions and proceedings, and incidents
requiring the reception of evidence before the courts,
quasi-judicial bodies, whose rules of procedure are
subject to disapproval of the Supreme Court, insofar
as their existing rules of procedure contravene the
provisions of this Rule, and investigating officers and
bodies authorized by the SC to receive evidence,
including the IBP
Submission of Judicial Affidavits and Exhibits in Lieu
of Direct Testimonies. [Sec. 2]
(a) The parties shall file with the court and serve on
the adverse party, personally or by licensed
courier service, not later than five days before
pre-trial or preliminary conference or the
scheduled hearing with respect to motions and
incidents, the following:
(1) The judicial affidavits of their witnesses, which
shall take the place of such witnesses' direct
testimonies; and
(2) The parties' documentary or object evidence, if
any, shall be marked and attached to the
judicial affidavits
(b) Should a party or a witness desire to keep the
original document or object evidence in his
possession, he may, after the same has been
identified, marked as exhibit, and authenticated,
warrant in his judicial affidavit that the copy or
reproduction attached to such affidavit is a
faithful copy or reproduction of that original. In
addition, the party or witness shall bring the
original document or object evidence for
comparison during the preliminary conference
with the attached copy, reproduction, or pictures,
failing which the latter shall not be admitted
This is without prejudice to the introduction of
secondary evidence in place of the original when
allowed by existing rules.
PAGE 232
EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION
Content [Sec. 3]
A judicial affidavit shall be prepared in the language
known to the witness and, if not in English or Filipino
accompanied by a translation in English or Filipino,
and shall contain the following:
(a) The name, age, residence or business address,
and occupation of the witness;
(b) The name and address of the lawyer who
conducts or supervises the examination of the
witness and the place where the examination is
being held;
(c) A statement that the witness is answering the
questions asked of him, fully conscious that he
does so under oath, and that he may face
criminal liability for false testimony or perjury;
(d) Questions asked of the witness and his
corresponding answers, consecutively numbered,
that:
(1) Show the circumstances under which the
witness acquired the facts upon which he
testifies;
(2) Elicit from him those facts which are relevant
to the issues that the case presents; and
(3) Identify the attached documentary and object
evidence and establish their authenticity;
(e) The signature of the witness over his printed
name; and
(f) A jurat with the signature of the notary public who
administers the oath or an officer who is
authorized by law to administer the same.
The judicial affidavit shall also contain a sworn
attestation executed by the lawyer who conducted or
supervised the examination of the ·witness, to the
effect that:
(1) He faithfully recorded or caused to be recorded
the questions he asked and the corresponding
answers that the witness gave; and
(2) Neither he nor any other person then present or
assisting him coached the witness regarding the
latter's answers. [Sec. 4]
A false attestation shall subject the lawyer
mentioned to disciplinary action, including
disbarment. [Sec. 4]
How to Offer [Sec. 6]
State the purpose of such testimony at the start of
the presentation of the witness
Objection [Sec. 6]
Adverse party may move to disqualify the witness or
to strike out his affidavit or any of the answers found
in it on ground of inadmissibility
UP COLLEGE OF LAW EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION

Offer and Objections to Exhibits [Sec. 8] WITH RESPECT TO THE TESTIMONY

Offer
When made: Upon the termination of the testimony ADMISSIONS & CONFESSIONS
of his last witness ADMISSIONS OF A PARTY
Admission
How made: Party shall immediately make an oral Any statement of fact made by a party against his
offer of evidence of his documentary or object interest/unfavorable to the conclusion for which he
exhibits, piece by piece, in their chronological contends/is inconsistent with the facts alleged by
order, stating the purpose or purposes for which him
he offers the particular exhibit.
It must:
Objection (1) Involve matters of fact, not of law
Made after each piece of exhibit is offered (2) Be categorical and definite
How made: Party shall state the legal ground for his (3) Knowingly and voluntarily made
objection, if any, to its admission.
By Act, Declaration or Omission
The court shall immediately make its ruling Requisites for Admissibility
respecting that exhibit. (1) Made by a party;
(2) Outside of court;
Note: It is sufficient that the exhibits are simply cited (3) Relates to a relevant fact; and
by their markings during the offers, the objections, (4) Is against admitter’s interest. [Sec. 26, Rule 130]
and the rulings, dispensing with the description of
each exhibit. Effect
May be given in evidence against the admitter [Sec.
Effect of Non-compliance [Sec. 10] 26, Rule 130]
Party who fails to submit is deemed to have waived
the submission of the same. The court, however, may Note: Flight from justice is an admission by conduct
allow, only once, late submission, provided the delay and circumstantial evidence of consciousness of
is for a valid reason and the defaulting party pays a guilt. [US v. Sarikala (1918)]
fine.
Rationale
Court shall not consider affidavit of witness who fails No man would make any declaration against himself
to appear at the scheduled hearing. Counsel who unless it is true. [Republic v. Bautista (2007)]
failed to appear shall be deemed to have waived his
client’s right to cross-examine the witnesses there As Distinguished from Judicial Admissions
present.
Judicial Extrajudicial
Judicial affidavits that do not conform with the Made in connection with Any other admission [Rule
requirements cannot be admitted as evidence. a judicial proceeding in 130, Secs. 26 and 32]
which it is offered [Rule
Issuance of Subpoena [Sec. 5] 129, Sec. 4]
If the government employee or official, or the
requested witness, who is neither the witness of the
adverse party nor a hostile witness, unjustifiably By Silence
declines to execute a judicial affidavit or refuses Requisites for Admissibility:
without just cause to make the relevant books, When silence is deemed an admission: [People v.
documents, or other things under his control Paragsa (84 SCRA 105)]
available for copying, authentication, and eventual (1) Person heard or understood the statement;
production in court, the requesting party may avail (2) That he was at a liberty to make a denial;
himself of the issuance of a subpoena ad (3) That the statement was about a matter affecting
testificandum or duces tecum under Rule 21 of the his rights or in which he was interested and which
Rules of Court. The rules governing the issuance of a naturally calls for a response;
subpoena to the witness in this case shall be the (4) That the facts were within his knowledge; and
same as when taking his deposition except that the (5) That the fact admitted from his silence is material
taking of a judicial affidavit shall be understood to be to the issue
ex parte.

PAGE 233
UP COLLEGE OF LAW EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION

When not applicable: Admission Confession

(1) Statements adverse to the party were made in
the course of an official investigation, neither fact or liability
asked to reply nor comment[Sec. 2(b), R.A. 7438]
Maybe express or tacit Must be express
(2) Party had justifiable reason to remain silent, ex.
Acting on advice of counsel [Regalado] Maybe made by 3rd Can be made only by the
parties, and in certain party himself, and
CONFESSIONS cases, admissible against admissible against his co-
A declaration of an accused acknowledging his guilt a party accused in some
of the offense charged, or of any offense necessarily instances
included therein [Sec. 33, Rule 130]
RES INTER ALIOS ACTA RULE
Requisites With Respect to Admissions by a “Third Party”
(1) Express and categorical acknowledgement of General Rule: Inadmissible. The rights of a party
guilt cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration or
(2) Facts admitted constitutive of a criminal offense omission of another. (1st Branch) [Sec. 28, Rule 130]
(3) Given voluntarily
(4) Intelligently made, realizing the importance or Exceptions:
legal significance of the act (1) Partner’s or agent’s admission [Sec. 29, Rule 130]
(5) No violation of Secs. 12 and 17, Art. III of the (2) Co-Conspirator’s admission [Sec. 30, Rule 130]
Constitution [Regalado] (3) Admission by privies [Sec. 31, Rule 130]
If the accused admits having committed the act in Partner’s or Agent’s Admission
question but alleges a justification therefore, the The requisites are the following:
same is merely an admission. [Ladiana v. People (393 (a) Act or declaration must be within the scope of the
SCRA 419)] authority of the partner or agent;
(b) Act or declaration must have been made during
Any confession, including a re-enactment, without the existence of the partnership or agency; and
admonition of the right to silence and to counsel, (c) Partnership or agency must be shown by
and without counsel chosen by the accused is evidence other than the act or declaration.
inadmissible in evidence. [People v. Yip Wai Ming
(1996)] Co-Conspirator’s Admission
The requisites are the following:
General Rule: An extra-judicial confession made by (a) Act or declaration must relate to the conspiracy;
an accused is not a sufficient ground for conviction. (b) It must have been made during the existence of
[Sec. 3, Rule 133] the conspiracy; and
(c) Conspiracy must be shown by evidence other
Exception: When corroborated by evidence of the than such act/declaration.
actual commission of a particular crime (corpus
delicti). [Sec. 3, Rule 133] Existence of the conspiracy may be inferred from the
acts of the accused. [People v. Belen (1963)]
Effect of Extrajudicial Confession of Guilt:
General Rule: Not sufficient for conviction [Sec, 3, Rule 130, Sec. 30 applies only to extra-judicial
Rule 133] statements, not to testimony given on the stand.
[People v. Serrano (1959)]
Exception: Sufficient if corroborated by evidence of
corpus delicti [Sec. 3, Rule 133] As regards extrajudicial admissions after termination of
conspiracy, before trial. — General Rule: These
Corpus Delicti admissions are not admissible.
Substance of the crime; the fact that a crime has
actually been committed [People v. Gutierrez (258 Exceptions:
SCRA 70); People v. De Leon (2009)] (1) Made in the presence of the co-conspirator who
expressly/impliedly agreed (tacit admission)
As Distinguished from Admissions of a Party (2) Facts in admission are confirmed in the
Admission Confession independent extrajudicial confessions made by
the co-conspirators after apprehension
Merely a statement of Acknowledgment of guilt

PAGE 234
UP COLLEGE OF LAW
(3) As a circumstance to determine credibility of
witness
(4) Circumstantial evidence to show the probability
of the latter’s participation [Regalado]
Doctrine of Interlocking confessions [Regalado]. —
Extrajudicial statements of co-accused may be taken
into consideration in judging testimony of the
witness, provided:
(a) Statements are made by several accused
(b) Identical in all material respects
(c) There could have been no collusion
They are admissible as:
(a) Circumstantial evidence to show probability of
participation
(b) Corroborative evidence if it is clear from other
facts and circumstances that other persons had
participated in the perpetration of the crime
charged and proved
Admission by Privies
Privies. — Persons who are partakers or have an
interest in any action or thing, or any relation to
another [Riano citing Black’s Law Dictionary]
The requisites are the following:
(a) There must be an act, declaration or an omission
by a predecessor-in-interest;
(b) Act, declaration or omission must have occurred
while he was holding (not after) the title to the
property; and
(c) Act, declaration or omission must be in relation to
the property.
With Respect to Similar Acts
General Rule: Evidence that one did or did not do a
certain thing at one time is NOT ADMISSIBLE to
prove that he did or did not do the same or similar
nd
thing at another time. (2 Branch) [Sec. 34, Rule 130]
Exceptions: Said evidence may be received to prove:
(1) Specific intent or knowledge;
(2) Identity;
(3) Plan, system, or scheme;
(4) Habit;
(5) Custom, usage and the like.
HEARSAY RULE
MEANING OF HEARSAY
(1) Out-of-court statement
(2) Offered by the witness in court to prove the truth
of the matters asserted by the statement
Any evidence, whether oral or documentary, if its
probative value is not based on personal knowledge
PAGE 235
EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION
of witness but on knowledge of some other person
th
not on witness stand [Regalado 11 ed.]
Doctrine of Independently Relevant Statements
Statements or writings attributed to a person not on
the witness stand, which are being offered not to
prove the truth of the facts stated therein, but only to
prove that such were actually made.
They are called as such because the statements are
admissible for some relevant reason independent of
their truth or falsity [Riano citing Am Jur]
These are NOT covered by the hearsay rule [People v.
Cusi (1965)]
REASON FOR EXCLUSION OF HEARSAY EVIDENCE
Lack of opportunity to cross-examine the outside
declarant
GENERAL RULE ON HEARSAY
A witness can testify only as to those facts which he
knows of his personal knowledge, or those derived
from his own perception. [Rule 130, Sec. 36]
The hearsay rule is not limited to oral testimony or
statements; it applies to written, as well as oral
statements. [Consunji v. CA (2001)]
If a party does not object to hearsay evidence, the
same is admissible, as a party can waive his right to
cross-examine [People v. Ola (1987)]
Repeated failure to cross-examine is an implied
waiver [Savory Luncheonette v. Lakas ng
Manggagawang Pilipino (1975)]
EXCEPTIONS
(1) Dying declaration
(2) Declaration against interest
(3) Act or declaration against pedigree
(4) Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree
(5) Common reputation
(6) Part of the res gestae [Sec. 42, Rule 130]
(7) Entries in the course of business
(8) Entries in official records
(9) Commercial lists and the like
(10) Learned treaties
(11) Testimony or deposition at a former trial
(12) Exception to the hearsay rule on examination of
child witness
Dying Declaration
Also known as “antemortem statement” or
“statement in articulo mortis” [Sec. 37, Rule 130]
UP COLLEGE OF LAW EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION

Requisites for Admissibility

(1) Declaration is one made by a dying person; Inability to testify means that the person is dead,
(2) Declaration was made under the consciousness mentally incapacitated or physically incompetent.
of an impending death; Mere absence from the jurisdiction does not make
(3) Declaration refers to cause and surrounding him ipso facto unavailable. [Fuentes v. CA (1996)]
circumstances of such death;
(4) Declaration is offered in any case wherein his Declaration against interest made by the deceased,
death is the subject of inquiry; or by one unable to testify, is admissible even against
(5) Declarant is competent as a witness had he the declarant’s successors-in-interest or even against
survived [Geraldo v People (2008)]; and third persons [Sec. 38, Rule 130]
(6) Declarant should have died. [People v. Macandog
(2001)] As Distinguished from Admissions
Declaration against
Rationale for Admissibility Admission
interest
As a general rule, when a person is at the point of
death, every motive to falsehood is silenced. [People Admitter is a party Declarant is neither a
v Bacunawa (2001)] himself, or in privity with party nor in privity with a
such party; party;
The law considers the point of death as a situation so Admissible whether or Admissible only when
solemn and awful as creating an obligation equal to not admitter is available declarant is unavailable
that which is imposed by an oath administered by as a witness as a witness;
the court. [People v. Cerilla (539 SCRA 251)]
Can be made any time, Must have been made
even during trial; ante litem motam;
The foreboding may be gleaned from surrounding
circumstances, such as the nature of the declarant’s Admissible only against Admissible even against
rd
injury and conduct that would justify a conclusion the admitter; and 3 persons; and
that there was consciousness of impending death. Admissible NOT as an Admissible as an
[People v. Latayada (2004)] If the declarant’s exception to any rule exception to the hearsay
statement is made under consciousness of rule
impending death, a subsequent belief in recovery
before his actual death does not bar admissibility of
his statement [Riano citing People v. Black (1979), 96 Act or Declaration Against Pedigree
CA3d 846, 158 CR 449] Meaning of Pedigree
(1) Relationship;
Objections to the dying declaration: May be (2) Family genealogy;
premised on any of the requisites for its admissibility (3) Birth;
embodied in Sec. 37 of Rule 130. Counsel who wants (4) Marriage;
a dying declaration excluded must have to deal with (5) Death;
the primary question of whether or not the (6) Dates when these facts occurred;
evidentiary foundations for the introduction where (7) Places where these facts occurred;
met. [Riano] (8) Names of relatives; and
(9) Facts of family history intimately connected with
Dying declarations are admissible in favor of the pedigree. [Sec. 39, Rule 130]
defendant as well as against him. [US v. Antipolo (37
Phil 726)] Requisites for Admissibility
(1) Declarant is dead or unable to testify;
Declaration Against Interest (2) Declarant must be related by birth or marriage to
Requisites for Admissibility the person whose pedigree is in issue;
(1) Declarant is dead or unable to testify; (3) Declaration was made before the controversy;
(2) Declaration relates to a fact against the interest and
of the declarant; (4) Relationship between the declarant and the
(3) At the time he made said declaration, declarant person whose pedigree is in question must be
was aware that the same was contrary to his shown by evidence other than such declaration.
interest; and [Sec. 39, Rule 130]
(4) Declarant had no motive to falsify and believed
such declaration to be true [Sec. 38, Rule 130;
Ong v. Court of Appeals (1980)]

PAGE 236
UP COLLEGE OF LAW
Family Reputation or Tradition Regarding Pedigree
Requisites for Admissibility
(1) Witness must be a member, by consanguinity or
affinity, of the same family as the subject; and
(2) Such reputation or tradition must have existed in
that family ante litem motam. [Sec. 40, Rule 130]
Other Admissible Evidence
(1) Entries in family bibles or other family books;
(2) Charts;
(3) Engravings on rings;
(4) Family portraits and the like [Sec. 40, Rule 130]
This enumeration, by ejusdem generis, is limited to
"family possessions," or those articles which
represent, in effect, a family's joint statement of its
belief as to the pedigree of a person. [Jison v. CA
(1998)]
A person’s statement as to his date of birth and age,
as he learned of these from his parents or relatives, is
an ante litem motam declaration of a family tradition.
[Gravador v. Mamigo (1967)]
Common Reputation
Requisites for Admissibility
(1) Reputation pertains to:
(a) Facts of public or general interest more than
30 years old,
(b) Marriage, or
(c) Moral character
(2) Common reputation existed ante litem motam.
[Sec. 41, Rule 130]
Other Admissible Evidence
(a) Monuments
(b) Inscriptions in public places [Sec. 41, Rule 130]
Pedigree may be established by reputation in the
family, but NOT in the community. [Rule 130, Secs.
40-41]
Common reputation is hearsay like any other
exception to the hearsay rule, but is admissible
because of trustworthiness. [Riano citing Reg. v.
Bedforshire, 4 E & B 535, 82 ECL 535, 542]
Part of the Res Gestae [Sec. 42, Rule 130]
Admissible Statements
(1) Spontaneous statements - Statements made by a
person while a startling occurrence is taking
place or immediately prior or subsequent thereto,
with respect to the circumstances thereof
(a) Principal act be a startling occurrence
(b) Statement made before declarant had
opportunity to contrive [Talidano v. Falcom
Maritime (2008)]
PAGE 237
EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION
(c) Statement refer to occurrence in question and
attending circumstances (Sec. 42, Rule 130) or
that the statements must concern the
occurrence in question and its immediate
attending circumstances [Talidano v. Falcom
Maritime (2008)]
(2) Verbal acts - Statements, which accompany an
equivocal act material to the issue and give it a
legal significance
(a) Principal act must be equivocal
(b) Act must be material to the issue
(c) Statement must accompany the equivocal act
(d) Statement gives legal significance to
equivocal act [Talidano v. Falcom Maritime
(2008)]
(e) Must be made at the time, not after, the
equivocal act was being performed
A dying declaration can be made only by the victim
after the attack while a statement as part of the res
gestae may be that of the killer himself after or
during the killing. [People v. Reyes]
A statement not admissible as dying declaration
because it was not made under consciousness of
impending death, may still be admissible as part of
res gestae if made immediately after the incident.
[People v. Reyes]
Entries in the course of business
Requisites for Admissibility [Sec. 43, Rule 130]
(1) Entries were made at, or near the time of the
transactions referred to;
(2) Such entries were made in the ordinary or regular
course of business or duty;
(3) Entrant was in a position to know the facts stated
in the entries;
(4) Entrant did so in his professional capacity, or in
the performance of duty and in the regular course
of business; and
(5) Entrant is now dead or unable to testify.
[Northwest Airlines v. Chiong (2008)]
If the entrant is available as a witness, the entries will
not be admitted, but they may nevertheless be
availed of by said entrant as a memorandum to
refresh his memory while testifying on the
transactions reflected therein. [Cang Yui v. Gardner
(1916)]
“Business records” are exempt from the hearsay rule.
[Rule 8, Sec. 1, Rules on Electronic Evidence]
Entries in the payroll, being entries in the course of
business, enjoy the presumption of regularity [Sapio
v. Undaloc Construction (2008)]
UP COLLEGE OF LAW
Entries in official records
Requisites for Admissibility
(1) Entries were made by a public officer in the
performance of his duties or by a person in the
performance of a duty specially enjoined by law
[Sec. 44, Rule 130];
(2) Entrant must have personal knowledge of the
facts stated by him or such facts acquired by him
from reports made by persons under a legal
duty to submit the same [Salmon, Dexter & Co. v.
Wijangco (1924)]; and
(3) Entries were duly entered in a regular manner in
the official records.
Entries in official records, just like entries in the
course of business, are merely prima facie evidence of
the facts therein stated. [secs. 43-44, Rule 130]
Entries in a police blotter are not conclusive proof of
the truth of such entries. [People v. Cabuang (1993)]
Baptismal certificates or parochial records of
baptism are not official records. [Fortus v. Novero
(1968)]
Commercial lists and the like
Requisites for Admissibility [Sec. 45, Rule 130]
(1) Such statements are contained in a list;
(2) Compilation is published for use by persons
engaged in that occupation; and
(3) It is generally used and relied upon by them.
Learned treaties
Requisites for Admissibility [Sec. 46, Rule 130]
(1) Published treatise, periodical or pamphlet is on a
subject of history, law, science, or art; and
(2) Court takes judicial notice of it, or
(3) Witness expert in the subject testifies that the
writer of the statement in the treatise, periodical
or pamphlet is recognized in his profession or
calling as expert in the subject
Testimony or deposition at a former trial
Requisites for Admissibility [Sec. 47, Rule 130; Manliclic
v. Calaunan (2007)]
(1) Witness is dead or unable to testify;
(2) His testimony or deposition was given in a former
case or proceeding, judicial or administrative,
between the same parties or those representing
the same interests;
(3) Former case involved the same subject as that in
the present case although on different causes of
action;
(4) Issue testified to by the witness in the former trial
is the same issue involved in the present case;
and
PAGE 238
EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION
(5) Adverse party had the opportunity to cross-
examine the witness in the former case.
Exception to the Hearsay Rule on Examination of
Child Witness
A statement made by a child describing any act or
attempted act of child abuse, not otherwise
admissible under the hearsay rule, maybe admitted
in evidence in any criminal or non-criminal
proceeding subject to the following rules:
(a) Before such hearsay statement may be admitted,
its proponent shall make known to the adverse
party the intention to offer such statement and its
particulars to provide him a fair opportunity to
object. If the child is available, the court shall,
upon motion of the adverse party, require the
child to be present at the presentation of the
hearsay statement for cross-examination by the
adverse part. When the child is unavailable, the
fact of such circumstance must be proved by the
proponent.
(b) In ruling on the admissibility of such hearsay
statement, the court shall consider the time,
content and circumstances thereof which provide
sufficient indicia of reliability. It shall consider the
following factors:
(1) Whether there is a motive to lie;
(2) The general character of the declarant child;
(3) Whether more than one person heard the
statement;
(4) Whether the statement was spontaneous;
(5) The timing of the statement and the
relationship between the declarant child and
witness;
(6) Cross-examination could not show the lack of
knowledge of the declaration child;
(7) The possibility of faulty recollection of the
declarant of child is remote; and
(8) The circumstances surrounding the statement
are such that there is no reason to suppose
the declarant child misrepresented the
involvement of the accused.
(c) The child witness shall be considered unavailable
under the following situations:
(1) Is deceased, suffers from physical infirmity,
lack of memory, mental illness, or will be
exposed to severe psychological injury; or
(2) Is absent from the hearing and the proponent
of his statement has been unable to procure
his attendance by process or other reasonable
means.
When the child witness is unavailable, his hearsay
testimony shall be admitted only if corroborated by
other admissible evidence.
UP COLLEGE OF LAW EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION

OPINION RULE 51(b), Rule 130]

General Rule: The opinion of a witness is not (b) Evidence of the witness’ good character is not
admissible. [Sec. 48, Rule 130] admissible until such character has been
impeached. [Sec. 14, Rule 130]
Exceptions:
(1) Expert witness RULE ON EXAMINATION OF A CHILD WITNESS
(2) Ordinary witness A.M. No. 004-07-SC

OPINION OF EXPERT WITNESS MEANING OF “CHILD WITNESS”

Expert witness is one who belongs to the profession (1) Any person who at the time of giving testimony is
or calling which the subject matter of the inquiry less than 18 years;
relates and who possesses special knowledge. [Sec. (2) In child abuse cases, a child includes one over 18
49, Rule 130] years but is found by the court as
(a) Unable to fully take care of himself, or
Opinion is: (b) Protect himself from abuse, neglect, cruelty,
(1) On a matter requiring exploitation, or discrimination
(a) Special knowledge, (c) Because of a physical or mental disability or
(b) Skill, condition.
(c) Experience, or
(d) Training APPLICABILITY OF THE RULE
(2) Which he is shown to possess (1) Shall apply in all criminal proceedings and non-
criminal proceedings involving child witnesses.
OPINION OF ORDINARY WITNESS [Sec. 1]
Admissible if [Sec. 50, Rule 130]: (2) The ROC provisions on deposition, conditional
(1) Proper basis is given, and examination of witnesses and evidence shall be
(2) Regarding: applied suppletorily. [Sec. 32]
(a) Identity of a person about whom he has
adequate knowledge; COMPETENCY OF A CHILD WITNESS
(b) Handwriting with which he has sufficient Every child is presumed qualified to be a witness. To
familiarity; rebut the presumption of competence enjoyed by a
(c) Mental sanity of a person with whom he is child, the burden of proof lies on the party
sufficiently acquainted; and challenging his competence. [Sec. 6(b)]
(d) Impressions of the
(i) Emotion, Requisites of Competency of a Child as Witness
(ii) Behavior, [People v. Mendoza (1996)]:
(iii) Condition, or (1) Capacity of observation;
(iv) Appearance of a person. (2) Capacity of recollection;
(3) Capacity of communication.
CHARACTER EVIDENCE
General Rule: Character evidence is not admissible. When the court finds that substantial doubt exists
regarding the ability of the child to
Exceptions: perceive/remember/ communicate, distinguish truth
CRIMINAL CASES from falsehood, or appreciate the duty to tell the
[RULE 130, SEC.51(A)] truth in court, a competency exam shall be
(a) Accused – May prove his good moral character, conducted.
which is pertinent to the moral trait involved in
the offense charged. The age of the child by itself is not a sufficient basis
(b) Prosecution – May not prove the bad moral for a competency examination. [Sec. 6(a)]
character of the accused, except in rebuttal.
(c) Offended Party – His/her good or bad moral The court has the duty of continuously assessing the
character may be proved if it tends to establish in competence of the child throughout his testimony.
any reasonable degree the probability or [Sec. 6(f)]
improbability of the offense charged.
EXAMINATION OF A CHILD WITNESS
CIVIL CASES (1) In open court [Sec. 11]
(a) Moral character is admissible only when pertinent (2) Alternative Modes
to the issue of character involved in the case. [Sec.

PAGE 239
UP COLLEGE OF LAW
(a) Live-Link TV Testimony, in Criminal Cases
where Child is a Victim or a Witness [Sec. 25]
(i) If there is a substantial likelihood that the
child would suffer trauma from testifying in
the presence of the accused, his counsel or
the prosecutor.
(ii) Trauma must be of a kind which would
impair the completeness or truthfulness of
the child’s testimony.
(b) Videotaped Deposition of a Child Witness
[Sec. 27]
(i) If the court finds that the child will not be
able to testify in open court at trial, it shall
issue an order that the deposition of the
child be taken and preserved by videotape.
(ii) The rights of the accused during trial,
especially the right to counsel and to
confront and cross-examine the child, shall
not be violated during the deposition.
LIVE-LINK TV TESTIMONY OF A CHILD WITNESS
[SEC. 25]
Live-link television testimony, in criminal cases where
the child is a victim or a witness
The court may order that the testimony of the child
be taken by live-link television if there is a substantial
likelihood that the child would suffer trauma from
testifying in the presence of the accused, his counsel
or the prosecutor.
The trauma must be of a kind which would impair
the completeness/truthfulness of the child’s
testimony.
If it is necessary for the child to identify the accused
at trial, the court may allow the child to enter the
courtroom for the limited purpose of identifying the
accused, or the court may allow the child to identify
the accused by observing the image of the latter on a
television monitor.
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF A CHILD WITNESS
[SEC. 27]
If the court finds that the child will not be able to
testify in open court at trial, it shall issue an order
that the deposition of the child be taken and
preserved by videotape.
The rights of the accused during trial, especially the
right to counsel and to confront and cross-examine
the child, shall not be violated during the deposition.
HEARSAY EXCEPTION IN CHILD ABUSE CASES
[Sec. 28]
PAGE 240
EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION
Proponent of hearsay statement shall make known
to the adverse party the intention to offer such
statement and its particulars.
If the child is available, court shall require the child
to be present at the presentation of the hearsay
statement for cross-examination by the adverse
party.
If unavailable, the fact of unavailability must be
proved by the proponent and his hearsay testimony
must be corroborated by other admissible evidence.
SEXUAL ABUSE SHIELD RULE
General Rule [Sec. 30(a)]: The following are
INADMISSIBLE in any criminal proceeding involving
alleged child sexual abuse:
(1) Evidence offered to prove that the alleged victim
engaged in other sexual behavior;
(2) Evidence offered to prove the sexual
predisposition of the alleged victim.
Exception [Sec. 30(b)]: Evidence of specific instances
of sexual behavior by the alleged victim to prove that
a person other than the accused was the source of
semen, injury or other physical evidence
PROTECTIVE ORDERS
Video/audio tapes that are part of the court record
may be viewed only by parties, their counsel, their
expert witness and the guardian ad litem. [Sec. 31(b)]
The court may issue additional orders to protect the
child’s privacy. [Sec. 31(c)]
Publication (or causing it) in any format any
identifying information of a child who is or is alleged
to be a victim/accused of a crime or a witness
thereof, or an immediate family of the child, shall be
liable for contempt of court. [Sec. 31(d)]
A child has a right at any court proceeding not to
testify regarding personal identifying information
that could endanger his physical safety or his family.
[Sec. 31(e)]
Offer and Objection
OFFER OF EVIDENCE
CONCEPT [Sec. 34, Rule 132]
(1) Court shall consider no evidence which has not
been formally offered
(2) Purpose for which the evidence is offered must be
specified
UP COLLEGE OF LAW EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION

Kind of Evidence When to Offer

AS DISTINGUISHED FROM IDENTIFICATION OF
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE evidence
[Interpacific Transit v. Aviles (1990)] Offer shall be done orally unless allowed by the court
Identification of to be done in writing.
Formal Offer of Exhibit
Documentary Evidence
Done in the course of the Done only when the party
trial and accompanied by rests his/her case Absence of an offer is a defect which is waived when
the marking of the a party fails to object when the ground became
evidence reasonably apparent, as when the witness is called to
testify without any prior offer. [Catuira v. CA (1994)]

RATIONALE WHY FORMER OFFER IS NEEDED

The defect caused by the absence of formal offer of
There is a need for a formal offer of evidence because exhibits can be cured by the identification of the
without such offer, the court cannot determine exhibits by testimony duly recorded and the
whether the evidence is admissible or not. [Riano] incorporation of the said exhibits in the records of the
case. [People v. Mate (1981)]
No evidentiary value can be given to pieces of
evidence not formally offered. [Dizon v, CTA (2008)] OBJECTION
CONCEPT
However, where the absence of an offer of What to object to When to object
testimonial evidence was not objected to as when
the witness was cross-examined by the adverse party Testimonial evidence Immediately after offer is
despite failure to make an offer of the testimony, the made
court must consider the testimony Question propounded in As soon as the grounds
the course of oral become reasonably
The provisions of the ROC on the inclusion on appeal examination apparent
of documentary evidence or exhibits in the records,
cannot be stretched as to include such pleadings or Offer done in writing Within 3 days after notice
documents not offered at the hearing of the case of the offer, unless a
[Candido v. CA, 1996)] different period is allowed
by the court
WHEN OFFER IS NOT REQUIRED The grounds for objection must be specified in any
(a) In a summary proceeding because it is a case.
proceeding where there is no full-blown trial;
(b) Documents judicially admitted or taken judicial PURPOSES OF OBJECTION
notice of; [RIANO]
(c) Documents, affidavits, and depositions used in (a) Made to keep out inadmissible evidence that
rendering a summary judgment; would cause harm to client’s cause (rules of
(d) Documents or affidavits used in deciding quasi- evidence are not self-operating)
judicial or administrative cases [Bantolino v. Coca (b) To protect the record (for future appeal)
Cola Bottlers, 2003 citing Rabago v. NLRC, 1991] (c) To protect witness from being embarrassed or
(e) Lost objects previously marked, identified, harassed
described in the record, and testified to by (d) To expose adversary’s unfair tactics
witness who had been subjects of cross- (e) To give trial court an opportunity to correct its
examination in respect to said objects [Tabuena v. own errors and at the same time warn the court
CA, 1991 citing People v. Napat-a, 1989] [Riano] that a ruling adverse to the objector may supply a
reason to invoke a higher court’s appellate
WHEN TO MAKE AN OFFER jurisdiction; and
[Sec. 35, Rule 132] (f) To avoid a waiver of inadmissibility
Kind of Evidence When to Offer
Objections must be specific enough to adequately
Testimonial At the time the witness is inform the court the rule of evidence or of
called to testify substantive law that authorizes the exclusion of
evidence [Riano]
Documentary and Object After the presentation of
a party’s testimonial

PAGE 241
UP COLLEGE OF LAW EVIDENCE BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION

General Objections — Do not clearly indicate to the (a) Incompetent,

judge the ground upon which the objections are (b) Irrelevant or
predicated. In cases where the incompetency of the (c) Otherwise improper.
evidence is so palpable that a mere general
objection is deemed sufficient and where the portion TENDER OF EXCLUDED EVIDENCE
of the evidence objected to is clearly pointed out, and [Rule 132, Sec. 40]
its illegality is apparent on its face, then the objection Documents marked as exhibits during the hearing
must be allowed. [Riano] but which were not formally offered in evidence
cannot be considered as evidence nor shall they have
FORMAL VS. SUBSTANTIVE OBJECTIONS evidentiary value. [Vda. De Flores v. WCC (1977)]
[RIANO]
Formal—One directed against the alleged defect in HOW TO TENDER EVIDENCE
the formulation of the question How to tender the
Substantive—Objections made and directed against Kind of evidence
evidence
the very nature of the evidence
Documentary Offeror may have the
REPETITION OF AN OBJECTION same attached or made
[Sec. 37, Rule 132] part of the record
When it becomes reasonably apparent in the course Testimonial Offeror may state for the
of the examination of a witness that the questions record the name and
being propounded are of the same class as those to other personal
which objection has been made, whether such circumstances of the
objection was sustained or overruled, it shall be witness and the
sufficient for the adverse party to record his substance of the
continuing objection to such class of questions. proposed testimony

A court may, motu proprio, treat the objection as a RATIONALE

continuing one. [Keller v. Ellerman & Bucknall (a) To allow the court to know the nature of the
Steamship] testimony or the documentary evidence and
convince the trial judge to permit the evidence or
RULING testimony; and
[Sec. 38, Rule 132] (b) Even if he is not convinced to reverse his earlier
(a) Should be given immediately after the objection ruling, the tender is made to create and preserve
is made, unless the court desires to take a a record for appeal [Riano]
reasonable time to inform itself on the question
presented. 2 METHODS OF MAKING THE TENDER
(b) Reason for sustaining or overruling an objection [Riano]
need not be stated. However, if the objection is (a) Where the counsel tells the court what the
based on two or more grounds, a ruling proposed testimony would be;
sustaining the objection on one or some of them (b) By using the question and answer form
must specify the ground/s relied upon.
(c) Reservation of a ruling by the court on an ERRONEOUS WAY OF MAKING TENDER
objection to the admissibility of evidence, without To make a mere general “offer of proof” without
subsequently excluding the same, amounts to a producing the witness or stating the evidence where
denial of an objection. [People v. Tavera] by the fact in issue is to be proved. [Riano]
STRIKING OUT OF AN ANSWER
MOTION TO STRIKE
[Sec. 39, Rule 132]
(1) Court may sustain an objection and order the
answer given to be stricken off the record if:
(a) Witness answers the question before the
adverse party had the opportunity to object,
and
(b) Such objection is found to be meritorious.
(2) The court may also, upon motion, order the
striking out of answers, which are

PAGE 242