E

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

RULE 128 General Provisions Sec. 1. Evidence defined. Evidence is the means, sanctioned by these rules, of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the truth respecting a matter of fact. (1) Sec. 2. Scope. The rules of evidence shall be the same in all courts and in all trials and hearings, except as otherwise provided by law or these rules. (2a) Evidence is the mode and manner of proving competent facts in judicial proceedings Proof is the result or effect of evidence. Proof of such Fact result when the requisite quantum of evidence of a particular fact has been duly admitted and given weight

Examples of special laws on Evidence: RA 4200 prohibits the admission in evidence in any judicial, quasi-judicial, legislative or administrative investigation of any communication or spoken word or any information procured by wire-tapping and related means specified in said law, except in cases therein specially permitted Code of Commerce (Art. 448) provides certain rules on the evidentiary weight of conflicting entries in merchants books

Bill of Rights: Section 2 - The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge after examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.

Factum Probandum is the ultimate fact or the fact sought to be established; refers to proposition Factum Probans is the evidentiary fact or the fact by which the factum probandum is to be established; refers to the materials which establish the proposition

The SC shall promulgate rules concerning pleadings, practice and procedure which shall e uniform for all courts of the same grade and shall not diminish, increase or modify substantive rights. (This includes rules of evidence) GR: New rules promulgated by the SC may validly be made applicable to cases pending at the time of such change, as the parties to an action have no vested right in the rules of evidence. EXC: In criminal cases, if the alteration of the rules of evidence would, for instance, permit the reception of a lesser quantum of evidence than what the law required at the time of the commission of the offense in order to convict, then the retroactive application of such amendatory law would be unconstitutional for being an ex post facto law. The law of evidence is principally found in the Rules of Court. However, some evidentiary rules are found in special laws.

Section 3 - (1) The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of the court, or when public safety or order requires otherwise, as prescribed by law. (2) Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding section shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding.

The right against self-incrimination cannot be invoked in situations covered by immunity statutes. The rules of evidence are specifically applicable only in judicial proceedings. GR: The rules of evidence apply in a suppletory character or by analogy and whenever practicable and convenient.

Charms Haw 3-B

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

EXC: Where the governing law on that particular proceeding specifically adopts the rules of evidence in the Rules of Court Classification of Evidence According to Form:

Test of Materiality: whether the fact it intends to prove is in issue or not Consequently, evidence may be relevant but may be immaterial in the case. 2. Direct / Circumstantial Evidence

1. Object (Real) Evidence that which is

directly addressed to the sense of the court and consists of tangible things exhibited or demonstrated in open court, in an ocular inspection, or at a place designated by the court for its view or observation of an exhibition, experiment or demonstration Evidence by autoptic proference by proferring or presenting in open court the evidentiary articles for the observation or inspection of the tribunal supplied by written instruments or derived from conventional symbols, such as letters, by which ideas are represented on material substances submitted to the court through the testimony or deposition of a witness

a. Direct

Evidence that which proves the fact in dispute without the aid of any inference or presumption of a fact or facts from which taken ether singly or collectively, the existence of the particular fact in dispute may be inferred as a necessary or probable consequence

b. Circumstantial Evidence proof

2. Documentary Evidence evidence

3. Cumulative Evidence

Corroborative

3. Testimonial Evidence that which is

a. Cumulative

Evidence evidence of the same kind and to the same state of facts

Other Classifications: 1. Relevant / Material / Competent Evidence

b. Corroborative

Evidence additional evidence of a different character to the same point

a. Relevant

Evidence evidence having any value in reason as tending to prove any matter provable in an action Evidence evidence directed to prove a fact in issue as determined by the rules of substantive law and pleadings not excluded by the Rules, a statute or the Constitution

4. Prima facie / Conclusive Evidence

a. Prima

b. Material

Facie Evidence that which, standing alone, unexplained or uncontradicted, is sufficient to maintain the proposition affirmed of evidence which the law does not allow to be contradicted

b. Conclusive Evidence that class

c. Competent Evidence one that is

Test of Relevance: the logical relation of the evidentiary fact to the fact in issue, i.e. whether the former tends to establish the probability or improbability of the latter

5. Primary / Secondary Evidence

Charms Haw 3-B

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

a. Primary or Best Evidence is

that which the law regards as affording the greatest certainty of the fact in question

2. Competent Relevant Evidence when it has such a relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its existence or non-existence; relevancy is determinable by rules of logic and human experience Competent Evidence when it is not excluded by law or the Rules of Court; competency is determined by the prevailing exclusionary rules of evidence The admissibility of evidence is determined at the time it is offered to the court. Object Evidence offered to the court when the same is presented for its view or evaluation, as in ocular inspections or demonstrations or when the party rests his case and the real evidence consists of objects exhibited in court Testimonial Evidence offered by the calling of the witness to the stand Documentary Evidence formally offered by the proponent immediately before he rests his case Every objection to the admissibility of evidence shall be made at the time such evidence is offered, or as soon thereafter as the objection to its admissibility shall have become apparent, otherwise the objection shall be considered waived. Doctrines or Rules of Admissibility

b. Secondary Evidence that which

is inferior to the primary evidence and is permitted by law only when the best evidence is not available

6. Positive / Negative Evidence

a. Positive Evidence when the

witness affirms that a fact did or did not occur

b. Negative Evidence when the

witness states he did not see or know of the occurrence of a fact

Positive Evidence is entitled to a greater weight since the witness represents of his personal knowledge the presence or absence of a fact; whereas in negative testimony, there is a total disclaimer of personal knowledge, hence without any representation or disavowal that the fact in question could or could not have existed or happened. When a witness declares of his own knowledge that a fact did not take place that is actually positive testimony since it is an affirmation of the truth of a negative fact. Sec. 3.Admissibility of evidence. Evidence is admissible when it is relevant to the issue and is not excluded by the law of these rules. (3a) Sec. 4.Relevancy; collateral matters. Evidence must have such a relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its existence or non-existence. Evidence on collateral matters shall not be allowed, except when it tends in any reasonable degree to establish the probability or improbability of the fact in issue. (4a) Two Requisites Evidence for Admissibility of

1. Conditional Admissibility where the

1. Relevant to the issue sought to be proved

evidence at the time of its offer appears to be immaterial or irrelevant unless it is connected with the other facts to be subsequently proved, such evidence may be received on condition that the other facts will be proved thereafter, otherwise the evidence already given will be stricken out 2. Multiple Admissibility where the evidence is relevant and competent for two or more purposes, such evidence should be admitted for any or all the purposes for which it is offered provided it satisfies all the requirements of law for its admissibility therefor 3. Curative Admissibility treats upon the right of a party to introduce incompetent evidence in his behalf where the court has admitted the same

Charms Haw 3-B

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

kind of evidence adduced by the adverse party a. American Rule admission of such incompetent evidence, without objection by the opponent, does not justify such opponent in rebutting it by similar incompetent evidence b. English Rule wherein if a party has presented inadmissible evidence, the adverse party may resort to similar inadmissible evidence c. Massachusetts Rule wherein the adverse party may be permitted to introduce similar incompetent evidence in order to avoid a plain and unfair prejudice caused by the admission of the other partys evidence What should determine the application of the Rule of Curative Admissibility? 1. Whether the incompetent evidence was seasonably objected to 2. Whether regardless of the objection vel no, the admission of such evidence will cause a plain and unfair prejudice to the party against whom it was admitted

symbols of nationality, the law of nations, the admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their seals, the political constitution and history of the Philippines, the official acts of legislative, executive and judicial departments of the Philippines, the laws of nature, the measure of time, and the geographical divisions. (1a) Sec. 2.Judicial notice, when discretionary. A court may take judicial notice of matters which are of public knowledge, or are capable to unquestionable demonstration, or ought to be known to judges because of their judicial functions. (1a) Sec. 3.Judicial notice, when hearing necessary. During the trial, the court, on its own initiative, or on request of a party, may announce its intention to take judicial notice of any matter and allow the parties to be heard thereon. After the trial, and before judgment or on appeal, the proper court, on its own initiative or on request of a party, may take judicial notice of any matter and allow the parties to be heard thereon if such matter is decisive of a material issue in the case. (n) Judicial Notice the cognizance of certain facts which judges may properly take and act on without proof because they already know them It has been held that the power to take judicial notice must be exercised with caution and every reasonable doubt on the subject must be resolved in the negative. For Ordinances: While the courts of justice are required to take judicial notice of the laws, the rule with respect to ordinances is different.

Lack of objection to incompetent evidence constitutes waiver by the party against whom it is introduced but does not deprive the opposing party of his right to object to similar rebutting evidence. (this technical rule, however, should be relaxed if one party would suffer a plain and unfair prejudice)

Collateral matters are matters other than the facts in issue and which are offered as a basis for inference to the existence or nonexistence of the facts in issue What the Rules prohibit is evidence of irrelevant collateral facts. Circumstantial Evidence evidence relevant collateral facts RULE 129 What Need Not Be Proved of

SECTION 1.Judicial notice, when mandatory. A court shall take judicial notice, without the introduction of evidence, of the existence and territorial extent of states, their political history, forms of government and

Municipal trial courts are required to take judicial notice of the ordinances of the municipality or city wherein they sit. HOWEVER, in the case of the Regional Trial Courts, they must take judicial notice only: a. When so required by statute b. In a case on appeal before them and wherein the inferior court took judicial notice of an ordinance involved in said case

For Decisions of Other Courts:

Charms Haw 3-B

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

GR: Courts are required to take judicial notice of the decisions of the appellate courts but not of the decisions of coordinate trial courts, nor even of a decision or the facts involved in another case tried by the same court itself EXC: When the parties introduce the same in evidence or where the court, as a matter of convenience, may decide to do so The judicial notice which the court is required to take should not be confused with the personal knowledge of the judge. For Foreign Laws: GR: Foreign laws may not be taken judicial notice of and have to be proved like any other fact EXC: 1. where said laws are within the actual knowledge of the court such as when they are well and generally known; OR 2. they have been actually ruled upon in other cases before it and none of the parties claim otherwise How to Prove a Written Foreign Law 1. Official Publication; OR 2. Duly attested and authenticated copy thereof Absent any of the foregoing proofs or admission, the foreign law is presumed to be same as that in the Philippines. (Doctrine of Processual Presumption) Sec. 4.Judicial admissions. An admission, verbal or written, made by the party in the course of the proceedings in the same case, does not require proof. The admission may be contradicted only by showing that it was made through palpable mistake or that no such admission was made. (2a) Judicial Admissions may be made in: 1. Pleadings filed by the parties 2. In the courts of the trial either by verbal or written manifestations or stipulations; OR 3. Other stages of the judicial proceeding, as in the pre-trial of the case To be considered as a judicial admission, the same must be made in the same case in which
Charms Haw 3-B

it was offered. If made in another case or in another court, the fact of such admission must be proved as in the case of any other fact, although if it was made in a judicial proceeding, it is entitled to greater weight. GR: Judicial admissions made in one case are admissible at the trial of another case provided they are proved and are pertinent to the issue involved in the latter. EXC: Unless, 1. The said admissions were made only for the purposes of the first case, as in the rule on implied admissions and their effects under Rule 26 2. The same were withdrawn with the permission of the court therein; OR 3. The court deems it proper to relieve the party therefrom Section 4 now, as amended, includes superseded pleadings as judicial admissions. Rationale for Judicial Admissions: estoppels RULE 130 Rules of Admissibility A. OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE SECTION 1.Object as evidence. Objects as evidence are those addressed to the senses of the court. When an object is relevant to the fact in issue, it may be exhibited to, examined or viewed by the court. (1a) Where an object is relevant to a fact in issue, the court may acquire knowledge thereof by actually viewing the object, in which case such object becomes objects (real) evidence, or by receiving testimonial evidence thereon. Conversely, the fact that an ocular inspection has been held does not preclude a party from introducing other evidence on the same issue. Whether an ocular inspection is to be made or not lies in the discretion of the trial court. An ocular inspection conducted by the judge without notice to or the presence of the parties is invalid as an ocular inspection is a party of the trial. Instances when a Court may refuse the Introduction of Object Evidence and rely on Testimonial Evidence alone:

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

1. When the exhibition of such object is

original document itself, except in the following cases: (a)When the original has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, without bad faith on the part of the offeror; (b)When the original is in the custody or under the control of the party against whom the evidence is offered, and the latter fails to produce it after reasonable notice; (c)When the original consists of numerous accounts or other documents which cannot be examined in court without great loss of time and the fact sought to be established from them is only the general result of the whole; and (d)When the original is a public record in the custody of a public officer or is recorded in a public office. (2a) Sec. 4.Original of document. (a)The original of the document is one the contents of which are the subject of inquiry. (b)When a document is in two or more copies executed at or about the same time, with identical contents, all such copies are equally regarded as originals. (c)When an entry is repeated in the regular course of business, one being copied from another at or near the time of the transaction, all the entries are likewise equally regarded as originals. (3a) Document is a deed, instrument or other duly authorized paper by which something is proved, evidenced or set forth The best evidence rule, applied to documentary evidence, operates as a rule of exclusion, that is, secondary (or substitutionary) evidence cannot inceptively be introduced as the original writing itself must be produced in court, except in the four instances mentioned in Section 3. The non-production of the original document unless justified under the exceptions in Section 3 of the Rule, gives rise to the presumption of suppression of evidence. In the case of real evidence, secondary evidence of the fact in issue may readily be

contrary to public policy, morals or decency EXC: Even if the object is repulsive or indecent, if a view of the same is necessary in the interest of justice, such object evidence may still be exhibited but the court may exclude the public from such view (e.g. when the immoral objects constitute the very basis for the criminal or civil action)

2. When to require its being viewed in court or in an ocular inspection would result in delays, inconvenience, unnecessary expenses out of proportion to the evidentiary value of such object 3. When such object evidence would be confusing or misleading, as when the purpose is to prove the former condition of the object and there is no preliminary showing that there has been no substantial change in said condition 4. When the testimonial or documentary evidence already presented clearly portrays the object in question as to render a view thereof unnecessary Documents are object (real) evidence IF the purpose is to prove their existence or condition, or the nature of the handwritings thereon or to determine the age of the paper used, or the blemishes or alterations thereon, as where falsification is alleged. Otherwise, documents are considered documentary evidence IF the purpose is to establish the contents or tenor thereof. B. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE Sec. 2. Documentary evidence. Documents as evidence consist of writing or any material containing letters, words, numbers, figures, symbols or other modes of written expression offered as proof of their contents. (n) 1. BEST EVIDENCE RULE Sec. 3.Original document must be produced; exceptions. When the subject of inquiry is the contents of a document, no evidence shall be admissible other than the
Charms Haw 3-B

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

introduced without having to account for the non-production of such primary evidence. But even with respect to documentary evidence, the best evidence rule applies only when the contents of such document is the subject of inquiry. Where the issue is only as to whether such a document was actually executed, or exists, or on the circumstances relevant to or surrounding its execution, the best evidence rule does not apply, and testimonial evidence is admissible. However, in criminal cases, where the issue is not only with respect to the contents of the document but also as to whether such document actually existed with the participation therein as imputed to the accused, the original itself must be established. (this affects however, only the weight to be given to such evidence) Affidavits and depositions are considered as not being the best evidence, hence not admissible if the affiants or deponents are available as witnesses. Carbon Copy Each carbon copy is considered an original provided that the writing of a contract upon the outside sheet, including the signature of the party sought to be charged thereby, produces a facsimile upon the sheets beneath, such signature being thus reproduced by the same stroke of pen which made the surface or exposed impression. However, even if said signature on each copy was written through separate acts, or even on separate occasions, it would be more accurate to say that all of said carbon copies are regarded as originals if each copy was intended as a repository of the same legal act of the party thereto. BUT imperfect carbon copies, e.g. those wherein the signatures of the parties are incomplete or which leave something else to be done in order that a document could evidence a binding obligation are merely secondary evidence. Cables and Telegrams With respect to telegrams and cables, on the question as to whether the dispatch sent or the dispatch received is the best evidence of the message, the better rule is that it depends on the issue to be proved, i.e., if the issue is the contents of the telegram as received by the addressee, then the original dispatch received
Charms Haw 3-B

is the best evidence; and, on the issue as to the telegram sent by the sender, the original is the message delivered for transmission. If the issue is the inaccuracy of transmission, both telegrams as sent and received are originals. 2. SECONDARY EVIDENCE Sec. 5.When original document is unavailable. When the original document has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, the offeror, upon proof of its execution or existence and the cause of its unavailability without bad faith on his part, may prove its contents by a copy, or by a recital of its contents in some authentic document, or by the testimony of witnesses in the order stated. (4a) Requisites for Introduction of Secondary Evidence: There must be proof by satisfactory evidence of: 1. Due execution of the original 2. Loss, destruction or unavailability of all such originals; AND 3. Reasonable diligence and good faith in the search for or attempt to produce the original How to Prove Due Execution: 1. Testimony of person/s who executed it 2. Testimony of the person before whom its execution was acknowledged; OR 3. Any person who was present and saw it executed and delivered or who thereafter saw it and recognized the signatures, or one to whom the parties thereto had previously confessed the execution thereof Intentional destruction of the originals by a party who, however, had acted in good faith does not preclude his introduction of secondary evidence of the contents thereof. Secondary Evidence (in the order stated): 1. Copy of said document 2. Recital of its contents in an authentic document; OR 3. Recollection of witnesses Nevertheless, where the law specifically provides for the class and quantum of secondary evidence to establish the contents of a document, or bars secondary evidence of a lost document, such requirement is controlling.

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

Sec. 6.When original document is in adverse party's custody or control. If the document is in the custody or under the control of adverse party, he must have reasonable notice to produce it. If after such notice and after satisfactory proof of its existence, he fails to produce the document, secondary evidence may be presented as in the case of its loss. (5a) Sec. 8.Party who calls for document not bound to offer it. A party who calls for the production of a document and inspects the same is not obliged to offer it as evidence. (6a) No particular form of notice is required, as long as it fairly apprises the other party as to what papers are desired. Such notice must, however, be given to the adverse party, or his attorney, even if the document is in the actual possession of a third person. The justified refusal or failure of the adverse party to produce the document does not give rise to the presumption of suppression of evidence, or create an unfavourable inference, against him. It only authorizes the introduction of secondary evidence. This Rule The production of the original document is procured by mere notice to the adverse party, and the requirements for such notice must be complied with as a condition precedent for the subsequent introduction of secondary evidence by the proponent Presupposes that the document to be produced is intended as evidence for the proponent who is presumed to have knowledge of its contents, secondary evidence thereof being available in case of its non-production Rule 27 Rule on Mode of Discovery Is in the nature of a mode of discovery and can be sought only by proper motion in the trial court, but is permitted only upon good cause shown

Rule as to the 3rd Exception It is justified not only by the fact that the records are voluminous but by the fact that the factum probandum is only the general result of the whole and not the detailed contents of the records. HOWEVER, where the detailed contents of the records of accounts are challenged for being hearsay or issues are raised as to the authenticity or correctness of the detailed entries, the originals have to be produced. Requisites of the 3rd Exception: 1. The voluminous character of the records must be established; and 2. Such records must be made accessible to the adverse party so that their correctness may be tested on crossexamination Sec. 7.Evidence admissible when original document is a public record. When the original of document is in the custody of public officer or is recorded in a public office, its contents may be proved by a certified copy issued by the public officer in custody thereof. (2a) This is so because by specific provision of Rule 132, such document may be evidenced by an official publication thereof or by a copy attested by the officer having the legal custody of the record, and in the case of an authorized public record of a private writing, the same may also be proved by a copy thereof attested by the legal keeper of the record.

3. PAROL EVIDENCE RULE Sec. 9. Evidence of written agreements. When the terms of an agreement have been reduced to writing, it is considered as containing all the terms agreed upon and there can be, between the parties and their successors in interest, no evidence of such terms other than the contents of the written agreement. However, a party may present evidence to modify, explain or add to the terms of written agreement if he puts in issue in his pleading: (a)An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake imperfection in the written agreement; or

Contemplates the situation wherein the document is either assumed to be favourable to the party in possession thereof or that the party seeking its production is not sufficiently informed of the contents of the same

Charms Haw 3-B

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

(b)The failure of the written agreement to express the true intent and agreement of the parties thereto; (c)The validity of the written agreement; or (d)The existence of other terms agreed to by the parties or their successors in interest after the execution of the written agreement. The term "agreement" includes wills. (7a) Evidence of a prior or contemporaneous verbal agreement is generally not admissible to vary, contradict, or defeat the operation of a valid instrument. 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 The following examples have to be put in issue: 1. Where the collateral agreement is not inconsistent with the terms of the written contract 2. Where the collateral agreement has not been integrated in and is independent of the written contract, as where it is suppletory to the original contract 3. Where the collateral agreement is subsequent to or novatory of the written contract 4. Where the collateral agreement constitutes a condition precedent which determines whether the written contract may become operative or effective The parol evidence rule does not apply, and may not properly be invoked by either party to the litigation against the other, where at least one party to the suit is not a party or privy of a party to the written instrument in question and does not base a claim or assert a right originating in the instrument of the relation established thereby. (Thus, if one of the parties is a complete stranger to the contract, he is not bound by the rule) Parol Evidence Rule Presupposes that the original document is available in court Best Evidence Rule Contemplates the situation wherein the original writing is not available and/or there is a dispute as to whether said writing is

Prohibits the varying of the terms of a written agreement

With the exception of wills, this rule applies only to documents which are contractual in nature (written agreements) Can be invoked only when the controversy is between the parties to the written agreement, their privies, or any party directly affected thereby, e.g. cestui que trust

the original Prohibits the introduction of substitutionary evidence in lieu of the original document regardless of whether or not it varies the contents of the original Applies to all kinds of writings

Can be invoked by any party to an action regardless of whether or not such party has participated in the writing involved

In order that parol evidence may be admissible, the mistake or imperfection of the document, or its failure to express the true intent and agreement of the parties, or the validity of the agreement must be put in issue by the pleadings. Even if the defences were not raised in the pleadings, but the parol evidence is not objected to, such objection is deemed waived.

Mistake refers to a mistake of fact which is mutual to the parties, OR where the innocent party was imposed upon by unfair dealing of the other Imperfection includes an inaccurate statement in the agreement, or incompleteness in the writing, or the presence of inconsistent provisions therein

As to the First Exception: Latent or Intrinsic Ambiguity included in the exception; when the writing on its face appears clear and unambiguous but there are collateral matters or circumstances which make the meaning uncertain, or where the writing admits of two constructions both of which are in harmony with the language used

Charms Haw 3-B

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

Patent or Extrinsic Ambiguity such ambiguity which is apparent on the face of the writing itself and requires something to be added in order to ascertain the meaning of the words used In such a case, parol evidence is not admissible, otherwise the court would not thereby be construing the contract but would be creating a contract between the parties. Intermediate Ambiguity where an ambiguity partakes of the nature of both patent and latent ambiguity because the words of the writing, though seemingly clear and with a settled meaning, is actually equivocal and admits of two interpretations In this case, parol evidence is admissible to clarify the ambiguity provided, as the rule now stands, that matter is put in issue by the pleader. 4. INTERPRETATION OF DOCUMENTS

Sec. 14.Peculiar signification of terms. The terms of a writing are presumed to have been used in their primary and general acceptation, but evidence is admissible to show that they have a local, technical, or otherwise peculiar signification, and were so used and understood in the particular instance, in which case the agreement must be construed accordingly. (12) Sec. 15.Written words control printed. When an instrument consists partly of written words and partly of a printed form, and the two are inconsistent, the former controls the latter. (13) Sec. 16.Experts and interpreters to be used in explaining certain writings. When the characters in which an instrument is written are difficult to be deciphered, or the language is not understood by the court, the evidence of persons skilled in deciphering the characters, or who understand the language, is admissible to declare the characters or the meaning of the language. (14) Sec. 17.Of Two constructions, which preferred. When the terms of an agreement have been intended in a different sense by the different parties to it, that sense is to prevail against either party in which he supposed the other understood it, and when different constructions of a provision are otherwise equally proper, that is to be taken which is the most favorable to the party in whose favor the provision was made. (15) Sec. 18.Construction in favor of natural right. When an instrument is equally susceptible of two interpretations, one in favor of natural right and the other against it, the former is to be adopted. (16) Sec. 19.Interpretation according to usage. An instrument may be construed according to usage, in order to determine its true character. (17)

Sec. 10.Interpretation of a writing according to its legal meaning. The language of a writing is to be interpreted according to the legal meaning it bears in the place of its execution, unless the parties intended otherwise. (8) Sec. 11.Instrument construed so as to give effect to all provisions. In the construction of an instrument, where there are several provisions or particulars, such a construction is, if possible, to be adopted as will give effect to all. (9) Sec. 12.Interpretation according to intention; general and particular provisions. In the construction of an instrument, the intention of the parties is to be pursued; and when a general and a particular provision are inconsistent, the latter is paramount to the former. So a particular intent will control a general one that is inconsistent with it. (10) Sec. 13.Interpretation according to circumstances. For the proper construction of an instrument, the circumstances under which it was made, including the situation of the subject thereof and of the parties to it, may be shown, so that the judge may be placed in the position of those who language he is to interpret. (11)

C. TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE
1. QUALIFICATION OF WITNESSES Sec. 20. Witnesses; their qualifications. Except as provided in the next succeeding section, all persons who can perceive, and perceiving, can make their known perception to others, may be witnesses.

Charms Haw 3-B

10

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

Religious or political belief, interest in the outcome of the case, or conviction of a crime unless otherwise provided by law, shall not be ground for disqualification. (18a) Sec. 21.Disqualification by reason of mental incapacity or immaturity. The following persons cannot be witnesses: (a)Those whose mental condition, at the time of their production for examination, is such that they are incapable of intelligently making known their perception to others; (b)Children whose mental maturity is such as to render them incapable of perceiving the facts respecting which they are examined and of relating them truthfully. (19a) GR: The qualifications and disqualifications of witnesses are determined as of the time said witnesses are produced for examination in court or at the taking of their depositions. EXC: With respect to children of tender years, their competence at the time of the occurrence to be testified to should also be taken into account, especially if such event took place long before their production as witnesses. GR: The interest which a witness has in the subject matter of the action or in its outcome does not disqualify him from testifying. EXC: Those covered by the rule on surviving parties, also known as the Dead Man Statute or the Survivorship Disqualification Rule Otherwise, the interest of the witness affects only his credibility but not his competency.

Revised Rules of Court: Person cannot be a state witness if he has been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude. Mental unsoundness of the witness at the time the fact to be testified to occurred affects only his credibility. Nevertheless, as long as the witness can convey ideas by words or signs and give sufficiently intelligent answers to questions propounded, she is a competent witness even if she is feeble-minded. Determining the Capacity of a Child Witness: 1. Capacity at the time the fact to be testified to occurred such that he could receive correct impressions thereof, 2. Capacity to comprehend the obligation of an oath; and 3. Capacity to relate those facts truly at the time he is offered as a witness In short, his capacity for observation, recollection and communication Sec. 22.Disqualification by reason of marriage. During their marriage, neither the husband nor the wife may testify for or against the other without the consent of the affected spouse, except in a civil case by one against the other, or in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latter's direct descendants or ascendants. (20a) Spousal Immunity Requisites of Spousal Immunity: 1. Valid marriage 2. Other spouse is a party to the action Objections to the competency of the spouse presented to testify against the other may be waived as in the case of other witnesses generally. In a prosecution of the husband for the rape of their daughter, the wife is not disqualified to testify for the prosecution since the crime may be considered as having been committed against the wife and the conjugal harmony sought to be protected by this rule no longer exists. Rationale for the Rule: 1. Identity of interests spouses between the

Unless otherwise provided by law, a person convicted of a crime is not disqualified but he must answer to the fact of a previous final conviction or such fact may be shown by his examination or the record of the judgment, since the same may be taken into consideration as affecting his credibility. Instances when Criminal Conviction in a Previous Crime Disqualifies a Person from testifying in the Probate of a Will: 1. Perjury 2. False testimony 3. Falsification of a document
Charms Haw 3-B

11

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

2. Consequent danger of perjury where one spouse testifies against the other 3. Legal policy on guarding marital confidence 4. Preventing domestic disunion 5. Danger of punishing one spouse through the hostile testimony of the other HOWEVER, it observed that where the marital and domestic relations are so strained, the foregoing considerations no longer apply. Sec. 23.Disqualification by reason of death or insanity of adverse party. Parties or assignor of parties to a case, or persons in whose behalf a case is prosecuted, against an executor or administrator or other representative of a deceased person, or against a person of unsound mind, upon a claim or demand against the estate of such deceased person or against such person of unsound mind, cannot testify as to any matter of fact occurring before the death of such deceased person or before such person became of unsound mind. (20a) Survivorship Disqualification Rule or Dead Man Statute Dead Man Statute Not completely disqualified but is only prohibited from testifying on the matters therein specified Applies only to a civil case or special proceeding over the estate of the deceased or insane person Marital Disqualification Complete and absolute disqualification

plaintiff would thereby be testifying in his defense.

2. The case is against the executor or

administrator or other representative of a person deceased or of unsound mind Defendant is being sued and defends in such representative capacity, and not in his individual capacity The rule applies regardless of whether the deceased died before or after the suit against him is filed, provided he is already dead at the time the testimony is sought to be given.

3. The case is upon a claim or demand against the estate of such person who is deceased or of unsound mind; and The rule does not apply where it is the administrator who brings an action to recover property allegedly belonging to the estate, or the action is by the heirs of a deceased plaintiff who were substituted for the latter.

4. The testimony to be given is on a matter of fact occurring before the death of such deceased person or before such person became of unsound mind Includes any matter of fact which bears upon a transaction or communication between the witness and the decedent, even though without the presence or participation of the latter Does not include negative testimony (or testimony that a fact did not occur during the lifetime of the deceased

Applies to a civil or criminal case, subject to the 2 exceptions provided

Requisites for the Dead Man Statute:

The rule does not include land registration cases instituted by the decedents representatives and also to cadastral cases since there is no plaintiff or defendant therein. Purpose: to discourage perjury and protect the estate from fictitious claims The prohibition does not apply where the testimony is offered to prove a claim less than what is established under a written document or is intended to prove a fraudulent transaction of the deceased provided such fraud is first established by evidence aliunde.

1. The witness offered for examination is a

party plaintiff, or the assignor of said party, or a person in whose behalf a case is prosecuted Must be a real party in interest Rule has no application to mere witnesses Also, this disqualification does not apply where a counterclaim has been interposed by the defendant as the

Charms Haw 3-B

12

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

The disqualification under this rule is waived if the defendant does not timely object to the admission of such evidence or testifies on the prohibited matters or cross-examines thereon. Sec. 24. Disqualification by reason of privileged communication. The following persons cannot testify as to matters learned in confidence in the following cases: (a)The husband or the wife, during or after the marriage, cannot be examined without the consent of the other as to any communication received in confidence by one from the other during the marriage except in a civil case by one against the other, or in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latter's direct descendants or ascendants; (b)An attorney cannot, without the consent of his client, be examined as to any communication made by the client to him, or his advice given thereon in the course of, or with a view to, professional employment, nor can an attorney's secretary, stenographer, or clerk be examined, without the consent of the client and his employer, concerning any fact the knowledge of which has been acquired in such capacity; (c)A person authorized to practice medicine, surgery or obstetrics cannot in a civil case, without the consent of the patient, be examined as to any advice or treatment given by him or any information which he may have acquired in attending such patient in a professional capacity, which information was necessary to enable him to act in capacity, and which would blacken the reputation of the patient; (d)A minister or priest cannot, without the consent of the person making the confession, be examined as to any confession made to or any advice given by him in his professional character in the course of discipline enjoined by the church to which the minister or priest belongs; (e)A public officer cannot be examined during his term of office or afterwards, as to communications made to him in official confidence, when the court finds that the public interest would suffer by the disclosure. (21a)

Objections under the disqualification rules can be invoked only by the persons protected thereunder and may be waived by said persons in the same manner.

A. Requisites for the 1st

Disqualification of MARITAL PRIVILEGE: 1. There was a valid marital relation 2. The privilege is invoked with respect to a confidential communication between the spouses during said marriage; and 3. The spouse against whom such evidence is being offered has not given his or her consent to such testimony The privilege cannot be claimed with respect to communications made prior to the marriage of the spouses. Since the confidential nature of the communication is the basis of the privilege, the same cannot be invoked where it was not intended to be kept in confidence by the spouse who received the same, as in the case of a dying declaration of the husband to his wife as to who was his assailant. The privilege is lost if the communication is overheard or comes into the hands of a third party whether legally or not by reason of the fact that while the spouse is covered by the prohibition, such third party is not, and consequently, can testify thereon. Disqualification by Reason of Marriage Can be invoked only if one the spouses is a party to the action Applies only if marriage is existing at the time the testimony is offered Constitutes a total prohibition against any testimony for or against the spouse of the witness Disqualification by reason of Marital Privilege Can be claimed whether or not the spouse is a party to the action Can claimed even after the marriage has been dissolved Applies only to confidential communications between the spouses

B. Requisites of Disqualification based

on ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE: 1. There is an attorney and client relation 2. The privilege is invoked with respect to a confidential communication between

Charms Haw 3-B

13

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

them in the court of professional employment 3. The client has not given his consent to the attorneys testimony thereon; or if the attorneys secretary, stenographer or clerk is sought to be examined, that both the client and the attorney have not given their consent thereto For the privilege to apply, the attorney must have been consulted in his professional capacity, even if no fee has been paid therefor. Preliminary communications made for the purpose of creating the attorney-client relationship are within the privilege. HOWEVER, if the communications were not made for the purpose of creating that relationship, they will not be covered by the privilege even if thereafter the lawyer becomes the counsel of the party in case involving said statements. The privilege DOES NOT apply to communications which are: 1. Intended to be made public 2. Intended to be communicated to others 3. Intended for an unlawful purpose 4. Received from third persons not acting in behalf or as agents of the client; OR 5. Made in the presence of third parties who are strangers to the attorney-client relationship

2. The communication is irrelevant to the professional employment 3. The communication was made for an unlawful purpose 4. The information was intended to be made public; OR 5. There was a waiver of the privilege either by provision of contract or law Under Rule 28 of the Rules of Court, the results of the physical and mental examination of a person, when ordered by the court, are intended to be made public, hence they can be divulged in that proceeding and cannot be objected to on the ground of privilege. (also includes autopsies or post-mortem examinations)

D. Requisites of Disqualification due

to Privileged Communications between MINISTERS OR PRIESTS AND PENITENTS: 1. Made pursuant to a religious duty enjoined in the course of discipline of the sect or denomination to which they belong 2. Must be confidential and penitential in character, e.g. under the seal of the confessional of Disqualification because of Privileged Communications to PUBLIC OFFICERS: 1. That it was made to the public officer in official confidence; and 2. That public interest would suffer by the disclosure of such communication, as in the case of State secrets RA 53, as amended by RA 1477 the publisher, editor or duly accredited reporter of any newspaper, magazine or periodical of general circulation cannot be compelled to reveal the source of any news report or information appearing in said publication which was related in confidence to him, unless the court or a House or committee of Congress finds that such revelation is demanded by the security of the State Art. 233 of the Labor Code provides that all information and statements made at conciliation proceedings shall be treated as privileged communications and shall not be used as evidence in the NLRC, and conciliators and similar officials shall not testify in any court or body regarding any matter taken up at the conciliation proceedings conducted by them

E. Requisites

C. Requisites
1. 2.

3. 4.

of Disqualification arising from PHYSICIAN-PATIENT PRIVILEGE: The physician is authorized to practice medicine, surgery or obstetrics The information was acquired or the advise or treatment was given by him in his professional capacity for the purpose of treating and curing the patient The information, advice or treatment, if revealed, would blacken the reputation of the patient; The privilege is invoked in a civil case whether the patient is a party thereto or not

It is not necessary that the physician-patient relationship was created through the voluntary act of the patient. The privilege DOES NOT apply where: 1. The communication was not given in confidence
Charms Haw 3-B

14

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

2. TESTIMONIAL PRIVILEGE Sec. 25.Parental and filial privilege. No person may be compelled to testify against his parents, other direct ascendants, children or other direct descendants. (20a) Under the Family Code, the descendant may be compelled to testify against his parents and grandparents, if such testimony is indispensable in prosecuting a crime against the descendant or by one parent against the other. 3. ADMISSIONS AND CONFESSIONS Sec. 26.Admission of a party. The act, declaration or omission of a party as to a relevant fact may be given in evidence against him. (22) Admission any statement of face made by a party against his interest or unfavourable to the conclusion for which he contends or is inconsistent with the facts alleged by him Admission Statement of fact which does not involve an acknowledgment of guilt or liability May be express or tacit May be made by third persons and in certain cases, are admissible against a party Confession Involves an acknowledgment of guilty or liability Must be express Can be made only by the party himself and in some instances, are admissible against his co-accused

Section 26 and 32 of this Rule refer to extrajudicial admissions. Declaration against Interest Must have been made against the proprietary or pecuniary interest of the party Must have been made by a person who is either deceased or unable to testify Must have been made ante litem motam Admission Need not be, although, of course it will greatly enhance its probative weight if it be so made Made by the party himself, and is a primary evidence and competent though he be present in court and ready to testify Can be made any time

Self-serving declaration one which has been made extrajudicially by the party to favor his interests; not admissible as evidence Self-serving testimony refers to the extrajudicial statement of a party which is being urged for admission in court Flight from justice is an admission by conduct and circumstantial evidence of consciousness of guilt. Sec. 27. Offer of compromise not admissible. In civil cases, an offer of compromise is not an admission of any liability, and is not admissible in evidence against the offeror. In criminal cases, except those involving quasioffenses (criminal negligence) or those allowed by law to be compromised, an offer of compromised by the accused may be received in evidence as an implied admission of guilt. A plea of guilty later withdrawn, or an unaccepted offer of a plea of guilty to lesser offense, is not admissible in evidence against the accused who made the plea or offer. An offer to pay or the payment of medical, hospital or other expenses occasioned by an injury is not admissible in evidence as proof of civil or criminal liability for the injury. (24a) In criminal cases, an offer of compromise is an implied admission of guilt, although the accused may be permitted to prove that such offer was not made under consciousness of

Requisites to be an ADMISSION: 1. Involve matters of fact, and not of law 2. Be categorical and definite 3. Be knowingly and voluntarily made 4. Be adverse to the admitters interests, otherwise, it would be self-serving and inadmissible Admissions may be: a. Verbal or written b. Express or tacit c. Judicial or extrajudicial Judicial Admission one made in connection with a judicial proceeding in which it is offered

Charms Haw 3-B

15

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

guilt but merely to avoid the risks of criminal action against him. In prosecutions for violation of the internal revenue laws, such offers of compromise are not admissible in evidence as the law provides that the payment of any internal revenue tax may be compromised, and all criminal violations may likewise be compromised, except those already filed in court and those involving fraud. Sec. 28.Admission by third party. The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or omission of another, except as hereinafter provided. (25a) Res inter alios acta alteri nocere non debet Exceptions to this Rule: 1. Instances where the third person is a partner, agent, joint owner, joint debtor or has a joint interest with the party 2. Co-conspirator 3. Privy of the Party Sec. 29.Admission by co-partner or agent. The act or declaration of a partner or agent of the party within the scope of his authority and during the existence of the partnership or agency, may be given in evidence against such party after the partnership or agency is shown by evidence other than such act or declaration. The same rule applies to the act or declaration of a joint owner, joint debtor, or other person jointly interested with the party. (26a) Requisites: 1. The partnership, agency or joint interest is established by evidence other than the act or declaration 2. That the act or declaration is within the scope of the partnership, agency or joint interest 3. Such act or declaration must have been made during the existence of the partnership, agency or joint interest As a rule, statements made after a partnership has been dissolved do not fall within this exception, but where the admissions are made in connection with the winding up of the partnership affairs, said admissions are still admissible as the partner is acting as an agent of his co-partners in said winding up.

Joint debtor does not refer to mere community of interest but should be understood according to its meaning in the common law system from which the provision was taken, that is, in solidum, and not mancommunada. Sec. 30. Admission by conspirator. The act or declaration of a conspirator relating to the conspiracy and during its existence, may be given in evidence against the co-conspirator after the conspiracy is shown by evidence other than such act of declaration. (27) Applies only to extrajudicial acts or statements and not to testimony given on the witness stand at the trial where the party adversely affected thereby has the opportunity to cross-examine the declarant

Requisites for the admission to be admissible: 1. Such conspiracy is shown by evidence aliunde 2. The admission was made during the existence of the conspiracy 3. The admission relates to the conspiracy itself GR: Extrajudicial admissions made by a conspirator after the conspiracy had terminated and even before trial are also not admissible against the co-conspirator. EXC: 1. If made in the presence of the latter who expressly or impliedly agreed therein as, in the latter case, it would be a tacit admission under Section 32 2. Where the facts in said admission are confirmed in the individual extrajudicial confessions made by the coconspirators after their apprehension 3. As a circumstance to determine the credibility of a witness; OR 4. As circumstantial evidence to show the probability of the latters participation in the offense In order that the extrajudicial statements of a co-accused may be taken into consideration in judging the testimony of a witness, it is necessary that the statements are made by several accused, the same are in all material respects identical, and there could have been no collusion among said co-accused in making such statements.

Charms Haw 3-B

16

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

Sec. 31. Admission by privies. Where one derives title to property from another, the act, declaration, or omission of the latter, while holding the title, in relation to the property, is evidence against the former. (28) Requisites: 1. There must be a relation of privity between the party and the declarant 2. The admission was made by the declarant, as predecessor-in-interest, while holding title to the property; AND 3. The admission is in relation to said property Sec. 32. Admission by silence. An act or declaration made in the presence and within the hearing or observation of a party who does or says nothing when the act or declaration is such as naturally to call for action or comment if not true, and when proper and possible for him to do so, may be given in evidence against him. (23a) Requisites: 1. He must have heard or observed the act or declaration of the other person 2. He must have had the opportunity to deny it 3. He must have had the opportunity to deny it 4. He must have understood the statement 5. He must have an interest to object, such that he would naturally have done so if the statement was not true 6. The facts were within his knowledge; AND 7. The fact admitted or the inference to be drawn from his silence is material to the issue The rule does not apply if the statements adverse to the party were made in the course of an official investigation. Sec. 33.Confession. The declaration of an accused acknowledging his guilt of the offense charged, or of any offense necessarily included therein, may be given in evidence against him. (29a) Confession categorical acknowledgment of guilt made by an accused in a criminal case, without any exculpatory statement or explanation

If the accused admits having committed the act in question but alleges a justification therefor, the same is merely an admission. Such confession may either be oral or in writing, and if in writing, it need not be under oath.

Judicial Confession one made before a court in which the case is pending and in the course of legal proceedings therein and by itself, can sustain a conviction even in capital offenses Extrajudicial confession one made in any other place or occasion and cannot sustain a conviction unless corroborated by evidence of the corpus delicti

Requisites of Confession to be Admissible: 1. The confession must involve an express and categorical acknowledgment of guilt 2. The facts admitted must be constitutive of a criminal offense 3. The confession must have been given voluntarily 4. The confession must have been intelligently made, the accused realizing the importance or legal significance of his act 5. There must have been no violation of Section 12, Art. 3 of the 1987 Constitution Confessions are presumed to be voluntary and the onus is on the defense to prove that it was involuntary for having been obtained by violence, intimidation, threat or promise of reward or leniency. Where the verbal extrajudicial confession was made without counsel, but it was spontaneously made by the accused immediately after the assault, the same is admissible not under the confession rule, but as part of the res gestae. GR: The extrajudicial confession of an accused is binding only upon himself and is not admissible against his co-accused. EXC: 1. If the latter impliedly acquiesced in or adopted said confession by no questioning its truthfulness 2. If the accused persons voluntarily and independently executed identical confessions without conclusion,

Charms Haw 3-B

17

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

3. 4.

5.

6. 7.

commonly known as interlocking confessions which confessions are corroborated by other evidence and without contradiction by the co-accused who was present Where the accused admitted the facts stated by the confessant after being apprised of such confession If they are charged as co-conspirators of the crime which was confessed by one of the accused and said confession is used only as a corroborating evidence Where the confession is used as circumstantial evidence to show the probability of participation by the coconspirator Where the confessant testified for his co-defendant Where the co-conspirators extrajudicial confession is corroborated by other evidence of record

Thus, evidence of another crime is admissible in a prosecution for robbery where it has the tendency to identify the accused or show his presence at the scene of the crime, but not where the evidence is to prove that the accused committed another crime wholly independent of that for which he on trial. Sec. 35. Unaccepted offer. An offer in writing to pay a particular sum of money or to deliver a written instrument or specific personal property is, if rejected without valid cause, equivalent to the actual production and tender of the money, instrument, or property. (49a) Merely an evidentiary complement to the rule on tender of payment by providing that said offer of payment must be made in writing Such tender of payment must, however, be followed by consignation of the amount in court in order to produce the effects of valid payment. 5. TESTIMONIAL KNOWLEDGE Sec. 36. Testimony generally confined to personal knowledge; hearsay excluded. A witness can testify only to those facts which he knows of his personal knowledge; that is, which are derived from his own perception, except as otherwise provided in these rules. (30a) Hearsay Evidence Rule any evidence, whether oral or documentary, when its probative value is not based on the personal knowledge of the witness but on the knowledge of some other person not on the witness stand Hearsay evidence is excluded because the party against whom it is presented is deprived of his right and opportunity to cross-examine the persons to whom the statements or writings are attributed. Consequently, if a party does not object to the hearsay evidence, the same is admissible, as a party can waive his right to cross-examine. EXC to Hearsay Evidence Rule: Hearsay testimony of a child describing any act or attempted act of sexual abuse may now be admitted in any criminal proceeding, subject to certain prerequisites and the right of crossexamination by the adverse party.

Illegal confessions and admissions are inadmissible against the confessant or the admitter, hence they are admissible against the persons who violated the constitutional prohibition against obtaining illegal confessions or admissions. The inadmissible evidence termed as the fruit of a poisonous tree in jurisprudence is that contemplated in the aforequoted Constitutional provisions. It refers to object, not testimonial evidence, and it refers to an object seized in the course of an illegal search and seizure. It does not refer to testimony or a confession obtained through an illegal arrest. 4. PREVIOUS CONDUCT AS EVIDENCE Sec. 34. Similar acts as evidence. 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 thing at another time; but it may be received to prove a specific intent or knowledge; identity, plan, system, scheme, habit, custom or usage, and the like. (48a) Exceptions to the Rule are where the evidence of similar acts may prove: 1. A specific intent or knowledge 2. Identity 3. Plan, system or scheme 4. Specific habit; OR 5. Established custom, usages and the like

Charms Haw 3-B

18

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

Section 47, regarding testimony or deposition at a former proceeding, is not an exception to the hearsay rule; actually, it requires for its admissibility that the party had either crossexamined or had the opportunity to crossexamine the witness at said former trial. 11 Exceptions to the Hearsay Sections 37-47 of the Rule Rule:

his part that he would not survive therefrom The intervening time from the making of the declaration up to the actual death of the declarant is immaterial, as long as the declaration was made under the consciousness of impending death which is a question of fact for the trial court to determine and as long as no retraction was made by the declarant until his demise. It is the belief in impending death at the time the statement was made, and not the rapid succession of death, that renders the dying declaration admissible. HOWEVER, the interval of time between the declaration and the death of the declarant may be taken into account where the declaration is ambiguous as to whether the declarant believed that his death was imminent when he made such declaration. A dying declaration has to be accepted with utmost case and should be considered in light of all the facts proved in the case. A dying declaration may be oral or written or made by signs which could be interpreted and testified to by a witness thereto. American jurisprudence is to the effect that dying declarations are on the same footing as testimony of a witness on the stand and whatever would disqualify such witness would also make such declarations incompetent evidence. b. DECLARATION INTEREST AGAINST

Doctrine of independently relevant statements independent of whether the facts stated are true or not, they are relevant since they are the facts in issue or are circumstantial evidence of the facts in issue Newspaper clippings or facts published in the newspapers are hearsay and have no evidentiary value unless substantiated by persons with personal knowledge of said facts. 6. EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE a. DYING DECLARATION

Sec. 37.Dying declaration. The declaration of a dying person, made under the consciousness of an impending death, may be received in any case wherein his death is the subject of inquiry, as evidence of the cause and surrounding circumstances of such death. (31a) Dying Declaration ante mortem statement or a statement in articulo mortis Requisites of Dying Declaration: 1. That death is imminent and the declarant is conscious of the fact 2. That the declaration refers to the cause and surrounding circumstances of such death 3. That the declaration relates to facts which the victim is competent to testify to 4. That the declaration is offered in a case wherein the declarants death is subject of the inquiry A declaration will be deemed as having been made under the consciousness of imminent death, in consideration of: 1. The words or statements of the declarant on the same occasion 2. His conduct at the time the declaration was made 3. The serious nature of his wounds as would necessarily engender a belief on
Charms Haw 3-B

Sec. 38.Declaration against interest. The declaration made by a person deceased, or unable to testify, against the interest of the declarant, if the fact is asserted in the declaration was at the time it was made so far contrary to declarant's own interest, that a reasonable man in his position would not have made the declaration unless he believed it to be true, may be received in evidence against himself or his successors in interest and against third persons. (32a) Admissions against Interest Those made by a Declarations against Interest Those made by

19

E
party to a litigation or by one in privity with or identified in legal interest with such party, and are admissible whether or not the declarant is available as a witness

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

person who is neither a party nor in privity with a party to the suit, are secondary evidence but constitute an exception to the hearsay rule, and are admissible only when the declarant is unavailable as a witness

rings, family portraits and the like, may be received as evidence of pedigree. (34a) Pedigree of a Person may be proved by the following: 1. Act or declaration of a relative 2. By the reputation or tradition existing in his family 3. By entries in family bibles, etc. 4. With respect to marriage, also by common reputation in the community Pedigree may be proved by other species of direct primary evidence. Requisites of EXCEPTION (c) on PEDIGREE: 1. The actor or declarant is dead or unable to testify 2. The act or declaration is made by a person related to the subject by birth or marriage 3. The relationship between the declarant or the actor and the subject is shown by evidence other than such act or declaration 4. The act or declaration was made ante litem motam, or prior to the controversy The rules do not require any specific relationship, but the weight to which such act or declaration is entitled may be affected by the degree of relationship. Requisites of EXCEPTION (d) on FAMILY REPUTATION: 1. The witness testifying thereto 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 e. COMMON REPUTATION Sec. 41. Common reputation. Common reputation existing previous to the controversy, respecting facts of public or general interest more than thirty years old, or respecting marriage or moral character, may be given in evidence. Monuments and inscriptions in public places may be received as evidence of common reputation. (35) Common reputation (general reputation) is admissible to prove: 1. Facts of public or general interest more than 30 years old 2. Marriage

Requisites for a DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST: 1. The declaration is dead or unable to testify 2. It relates to a fact against the interest of the declarant 3. At the time he made said declaration the declarant was aware that the same was contrary to his aforesaid interest 4. The declarant had no motive to falsify and believed such declaration to be true c. ACT OR DECLARATION ABOUT PEDIGREE Sec. 39.Act or declaration about pedigree. The act or declaration of a person deceased, or unable to testify, in respect to the pedigree of another person related to him by birth or marriage, may be received in evidence where it occurred before the controversy, and the relationship between the two persons is shown by evidence other than such act or declaration. The word "pedigree" includes relationship, family genealogy, birth, marriage, death, the dates when and the places where these fast occurred, and the names of the relatives. It embraces also facts of family history intimately connected with pedigree. (33a) d. FAMILY REPUTATION OR TRADITION REGARDING PEDIGREE Sec. 40.Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree. The reputation or tradition existing in a family previous to the controversy, in respect to the pedigree of any one of its members, may be received in evidence if the witness testifying thereon be also a member of the family, either by consanguinity or affinity. Entries in family bibles or other family books or charts, engravings on

Charms Haw 3-B

20

E
3. Moral character

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

Matters of public interest are those of national interest, while matters of general interest are those affecting inhabitants of a particular region or community. It is necessary that the common reputation existed ante litem motam. Common reputation regarding marriage or moral character is not required to be more than 30 years old. Common reputation the definite opinion of the community in which the fact to be proved is known or exists; the general or substantially undivided reputation, as distinguished from a partial or qualified one, although it need not be unanimous Character of a person is also permitted to be established by his common reputation. f. RES GESTAE

with a homicidal act Can be made only by the victim

Made only after the homicidal attack has been committed Trustworthiness of the declaration is based upon its being given under an awareness of impending death

May be made by that of the killer himself after or during the killing or that of a third person Statement may precede, accompany or be made after the homicidal act was committed Has its justification in the spontaneity of the statement

While the statements of the victim may not qualify as a dying declaration because it was not made under the consciousness of impending death, it may still be admissible as part of the res gestae if it was made immediately after the incident. Where the elements of both are present, the statement may be admitted both as a dying declaration and as part of the res gestae. Requisites of Res Gestae: 1. be spontaneous 2. be made while a startling occurrence is taking place or immediately prior or subsequent thereto, and 3. relate to the circumstances of the startling occurrence GR: The interval of time between the startling occurrence and the statement depends upon the circumstances; but such statement must have been made while the declarant was under the immediate influence of the startling occurrence, hence it is generally required to have been made immediately prior or subsequent to the event. EXC: if the declarant was rendered unconscious after the startling occurrence, his statements relative thereto upon regaining consciousness are still part of the res gestae regardless of the time that intervened. Requisites of the SECOND TYPE OF RES GESTAE: 1. the res gestae or principal act to be characterized must be equivocal 2. such act must be material to the issue

Sec. 42. Part of res gestae. Statements made by a person while a starting occurrence is taking place or immediately prior or subsequent thereto with respect to the circumstances thereof, may be given in evidence as part of res gestae. So, also, statements accompanying an equivocal act material to the issue, and giving it a legal significance, may be received as part of the res gestae. (36a) Res Gestae means things done a. Spontaneous statements in connection with a startling occurrence relating to that fact and in effect forming part thereof; and b. Statements accompanying an equivocal act, otherwise known as verbal acts, on the theory that they are the verbal parts of the act to be explained Requisites of FIRST TYPE OF RES GESTAE: 1. The principal act, the res gestae, be a startling occurrence 2. The statements forming part thereof were made before the declarant had the opportunity to contrive; and 3. The statements refer to the occurrence in question and its attending circumstances Dying Declaration Res Gestae

Charms Haw 3-B

21

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

3. the statements must accompany the equivocal act; AND 4. the statements give a legal significance to the equivocal act g. ENTRIES IN BUSINESS THE COURSE OF

performance of his duty by a public officer of the Philippines, or by a person in the performance of a duty specially enjoined by law, are prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated. (38) Requisites of ENTRIES IN OFFICIAL RECORDS: 1. The 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 2. The entrant had personal knowledge of the facts stated by him or such facts were acquired by him from reports made by persons under a legal duty to submit the same 3. Such entries were duly entered in a regular manner in the official records The entrant must have been competent with respect to the facts stated in his entries. Consequently, while a priest who officiates at a baptism acts pursuant to a legal duty in recording the facts of such baptism in a register, such entries in the register are not admissible to prove the date of birth of the child or its relation to particular persons, as the entrant priest was not competent to testify with respect to the truth of these latter facts. Baptismal certificates or parochial records of baptism are not public or official records and are not proof of relationship or filiation of the child baptized. i. COMMERCIAL LIST

Sec. 43. Entries in the course of business. Entries made at, or near the time of transactions to which they refer, by a person deceased, or unable to testify, who was in a position to know the facts therein stated, may be received as prima facie evidence, if such person made the entries in his professional capacity or in the performance of duty and in the ordinary or regular course of business or duty. (37a) Requisites of ENTRIES IN THE COURSE OF BUSINESS: 1. The person who made the entry must be dead or unable to testify 2. The entries were made at or near the time of the transactions to which they refer 3. The entrant was in a position to know the facts stated in the entries 4. The entries were made in his professional capacity or in the performance of a duty, whether legal, contractual, moral or religious 5. The entries were made in the ordinary or regular course of business or duty If the entrant is available as a witness, the said entries will not be admitted as an exception to the hearsay rule, but they may nevertheless be availed of by said entrant as a memorandum to refresh his memory while testifying on the transaction reflected therein. In the presentation and admission as evidence of entries made in the regular course of business, there is no overriding necessity to bring into court all the clerks or employees who individually made the entries in a long account. It is sufficient that the person who supervises the work of the clerks or other employees making the entries testify that the account was prepared under his supervision and that the entries were regularly entered in the ordinary course of business. h. ENTRIES IN OFFICIAL RECORDS Sec. 44. Entries in official records. Entries in official records made in the
Charms Haw 3-B

Sec. 45.Commercial lists and the like. Evidence of statements of matters of interest to persons engaged in an occupation contained in a list, register, periodical, or other published compilation is admissible as tending to prove the truth of any relevant matter so stated if that compilation is published for use by persons engaged in that occupation and is generally used and relied upon by them therein. (39) j. LEARNED TREATISES

Sec. 46. Learned treatises. A published treatise, periodical or pamphlet on a subject of history, law, science, or art is admissible as tending to prove the truth of a matter stated therein if the court takes judicial notice, or a witness expert in the subject testifies, that the

22

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

writer of the statement in the treatise, periodical or pamphlet is recognized in his profession or calling as expert in the subject. (40a) LEARNED TREATISES to be admissible: 1. The court takes judicial notice thereof, or 2. The same are testified to by a witness expert in the subject k. TESTIMONY OR DEPOSITION AT A FORMER PROCEEDING Sec. 47. Testimony or deposition at a former proceeding. The testimony or deposition of a witness deceased or unable to testify, given in a former case or proceeding, judicial or administrative, involving the same parties and subject matter, may be given in evidence against the adverse party who had the opportunity to cross-examine him. (41a) Requisites to be admissible as an exception to the hearsay rule: 1. The 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. The former case involved the same subject as that in the present case, although on different causes of action 4. The issue testified to by the witness in the former trial is the same issue involved in the present case 5. The adverse party had an opportunity to cross-examine the witness in the former case Where the witnesses in question are available but they refused to testify, they do not come within the legal purview of those unable to testify contemplated in the Rule. Either party could utilize the testimony of a witness who is no longer available, whether the same was given in another case, judicial or administrative, but involving the same parties and subject matter, with the adverse party having the opportunity to cross-examine said witness. A judgment in a criminal proceeding and this rule applies with equal, if not greater, force to administrative proceedings, cannot be read in
Charms Haw 3-B

evidence in a civil action against a person not a party thereto to establish any fact therein determined. HOWEVER, it was subsequently held that a judgment of conviction, in the absence of collusion between the accused and the offended party, is binding and conclusive upon the person subsidiarily liable not only with regard to his subsidiary liability but also with regard to the amount thereof. 7. OPINION RULE

Sec. 48.General rule. The opinion of witness is not admissible, except as indicated in the following sections. (42) Sec. 49.Opinion of expert witness. The opinion of a witness on a matter requiring special knowledge, skill, experience or training which he shown to posses, may be received in evidence. (43a) Sec. 50.Opinion of ordinary witnesses. The opinion of a witness for which proper basis is given, may be received in evidence regarding (a)the identity of a person about whom he has adequate knowledge; (b)A handwriting with which he has sufficient familiarity; and (c)The mental sanity of a person with whom he is sufficiently acquainted. The witness may also testify on his impressions of the emotion, behavior, condition or appearance of a person. (44a) The opinion of a witness is admissible in evidence in the following instances: 1. On a matter requiring special knowledge, skill, experience or training which he possesses, that is, when he is an expert thereon 2. Regarding the identity or the handwriting of a person, when he has knowledge of the person or handwriting,

23

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

whether he is an ordinary or expert witness 3. On the mental sanity of a person, if the witness is sufficiently acquainted with the former or if the latter is an expert witness 4. On the emotion, behaviour, condition or appearance of a person which he has observed 5. On ordinary matters known to all men of common perception, such as the value of ordinary household articles Expert Witness one who belongs to the profession or calling to which the subject matter of the inquiry relates and who possesses special knowledge on questions on which he proposes to express an opinion Factors to show Expertness of Witness: 1. Training and education 2. Particular, first-hand familiarity with the facts of the case 3. Presentation of authorities or standards upon which his opinion is based Requisites of admissible: Expert Evidence to be

8. CHARACTER EVIDENCE Sec. 51.Character evidence not generally admissible; exceptions: (a)In Criminal Cases: (1)The accused may prove his good moral character which is pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense charged. (2)Unless in rebuttal, the prosecution may not prove his bad moral character which is pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense charged. (3)The good or bad moral character of the offended party may be proved if it tends to establish in any reasonable degree the probability or improbability of the offense charged. (b)In Civil Cases: Evidence of the moral character of a party in civil case is admissible only when pertinent to the issue of character involved in the case. (c)In the case provided for in Rule 132, Section 14, (46a, 47a) In criminal cases: 1. The prosecution may not at the outset prove the bad moral character of the accused which is pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense charged. If the accused, however, in his defense attempts to prove his good moral character, then the prosecution can introduce evidence of such bad moral character at the rebuttal stage. 2. The good or bad moral character of the offended party may always be proved by either party as long as such evidence tends to establish the probability or improbability of the offense charged. In civil cases: The moral character of either party thereto can not be proved unless it is

1. The matter to be testified to is one that requires expertise; and 2. The witness has been qualified as an expert Generally, expert evidence is regarded, not as conclusive, but purely advisory in character. Requisites for a Tape Recording to be admissible: 1. The recording device was capable of taking testimony 2. The operator of the device was competent 3. No changes, additions or deletions have been made 4. The testimony was elicited and voluntarily made without any kind of inducement 5. The establishment of the authenticity and correctness of the recording 6. The identity of the speakers 7. The manner of the preservation of the recording

Charms Haw 3-B

24

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

pertinent to the issue of character involved in the case. In both civil and criminal cases: The bad moral character of a witness may always be proved by either party, but not evidence of his good character, unless it has been impeached.

In criminal cases, the prosecution cannot initially attack the character of the accused and can only do so if the accused opens that issue by introducing evidence of his good moral character when he makes his defense. Nature or substance of the character evidence which may be admissible:

1. With respect to the accused, such

character evidence must be pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense charged. 2. With respect to the offended person, it is sufficient that such character evidence may establish in any reasonable degree the probability or improbability of the offense charged, as in the prosecutions for rape 3. With respect to witnesses, such character evidence must refer to his general reputation for truth, honesty or integrity that is, as affecting his credibility. EXC: Proof of the bad character of the victim in a murder case is not admissible if the crime was committed through treachery or premeditation, in the same manner that the bad moral character of a victim in a rape case is not admissible if the crime was committed by violence or intimidation. In civil cases, for character evidence of a party to be admissible, the issue involved must be character.

Charms Haw 3-B

25

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

RULE 131 Burden of Proof and Presumptions 1. Burden of Proof SECTION 1.Burden of proof. Burden of proof is the duty of a party to present evidence on the facts in issue necessary to establish his claim or defense by the amount of evidence required by law. (1a, 2a) Formerly, in criminal cases, the quantum of evidence was as follows: Burden of Evidence

notice and admissions

In both civil and criminal cases, the burden of evidence lies with the party who asserts an affirmative allegation. In criminal cases, the prosecution has to prove its affirmative allegations in the indictment regarding the elements of the crime, as well as the attendant circumstances; while the defense has to prove its affirmative allegations regarding the existence of justifying or exempting circumstances, absolutory causes or mitigating circumstances. GR: In both civil and criminal cases, negative allegations do not have to be proved. EXC: Where such negative allegations are essential parts of the cause of action or defense in a civil case, or are essential ingredients of the offense in a criminal case or the defences thereto (Ex. Breach of contract, illegal possession of firearms, crimes of omission) EXC to EXC: In civil cases, even if the negative allegation is an essential part of the cause of action or defense, such negative allegation does not have to be proved if it is only for the purpose of denying the existence of a document which should properly be in the custody of the adverse party. GR: If the criminal charge is predicated on a negative allegation or that a negative averment is an essential element of a crime, the prosecution has the burden of proving the charge. EXC: Where the negative of an issue does not permit of direct proof, or where the facts are more immediately within the knowledge of the accused, the onus probandi rests on him.(It is not incumbent upon the prosecution to adduce positive evidence to support a negative averment the truth of which is fairly indicated by established circumstances and which, if untrue, could readily be disproved by documents or other evidence within the knowledge of the accused. 2. What Need not be Proved The following facts need not be proved:

1. For the issuance of a warrant of arrest

after preliminary examination probable cause, i.e. that there is reasonable ground to believe that the accused has committed an offense 2. For the filing of an information prima facie evidence 3. To sustain a conviction guilt beyond reasonable doubt Charges of misconduct against judges require clear and convincing evidence while the ground for their removal should be established beyond reasonable doubt. Burden of Proof: In civil cases burden of proof is on the party who would be defeated if no evidence were given on either side In criminal cases burden of proof is always on the prosecution Burden of Proof Does not shift as it remains throughout the trial with the party upon whom it is imposed Generally determined by the pleadings filed by the party Burden of Evidence Shifts from party to party depending upon the exigencies of the case in the course of trial Generally determined by the developments at the trial, or by the provisions of the substantive law or procedural rules which may relieve the party from presenting evidence on the fact alleged, i.e. presumptions, judicial

Charms Haw 3-B

26

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

1. Facts which are presumed 2. Facts which are of judicial notice 3. Facts which are judicially admitted

such declaration, act or omission, be permitted to falsify it: (b)The tenant is not permitted to deny the title of his landlord at the time of commencement of the relation of landlord and tenant between them. (3a) This is based upon the doctrine of estoppels in pais. ii. Disputable Presumptions

A. Facts which are Presumed Presumption an inference of the existence or non-existence of a fact which courts are permitted to draw from the proof of other facts Presumption The proponent still has to introduce evidence of the basis of the presumption, that is, he has to introduce evidence of the existence or nonexistence of the facts from which the court can draw the inference of the fact in issue Judicial Notice and Judicial Admissions The proponent does not have to introduce any evidence

Sec. 3.Disputable presumptions. The following presumptions are satisfactory if uncontradicted, but may be contradicted and overcome by other evidence: (a)That a person is innocent of crime or wrong; (b)That an unlawful act was done with an unlawful intent; (c)That a person intends the consequences of his voluntary act; ordinary

Classification of Presumptions: Presumption of law a certain inference must be made whenever the facts appear which furnish the basis of the inference Reduced to fixed rules and form a part of the system of jurisprudence Presumption of fact a discretion is vested in the tribunal as to drawing the inference

(d)That a person takes ordinary care of his concerns; (e)That evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if produced; (f)That money paid by one to another was due to the latter;

Derived wholly and directly from the circumstances of the particular case by means of the common experience of mankind

(g)That a thing delivered by one to another belonged to the latter; (h)That an obligation delivered up to the debtor has been paid; (i)That prior rents or installments had been paid when a receipt for the later one is produced; (j)That a person found in possession of a thing taken in the doing of a recent wrongful act is the taker and the doer of the whole act; otherwise, that things which a person possess, or exercises acts of ownership over, are owned by him; (k)That a person in possession of an order on himself for the payment of the money, or the

i.

Conclusive Presumptions

Sec. 2.Conclusive presumptions. The following are instances of conclusive presumptions: (a)Whenever a party has, by his own declaration, act, or omission, intentionally and deliberately led to another to believe a particular thing true, and to act upon such belief, he cannot, in any litigation arising out of

Charms Haw 3-B

27

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

delivery of anything, has paid the money or delivered the thing accordingly; (l)That a person acting in a public office was regularly appointed or elected to it; (m)That official performed; duty has been regularly

The following shall be considered dead for all purposes including the division of the estate among the heirs: (1)A person on board a vessel lost during a sea voyage, or an aircraft with is missing, who has not been heard of for four years since the loss of the vessel or aircraft; (2)A member of the armed forces who has taken part in armed hostilities, and has been missing for four years; (3)A person who has been in danger of death under other circumstances and whose existence has not been known for four years; (4)If a married person has been absent for four consecutive years, the spouse present may contract a subsequent marriage if he or she has well-founded belief that the absent spouse is already death. In case of disappearance, where there is a danger of death the circumstances hereinabove provided, an absence of only two years shall be sufficient for the purpose of contracting a subsequent marriage. However, in any case, before marrying again, the spouse present must institute a summary proceedings as provided in the Family Code and in the rules for declaration of presumptive death of the absentee, without prejudice to the effect of reappearance of the absent spouse. (x)That acquiescence resulted from a belief that the thing acquiesced in was conformable to the law or fact; (y)That things have happened according to the ordinary course of nature and ordinary nature habits of life; (z)That persons acting as copartners have entered into a contract of copartneship; (aa)That a man and woman deporting themselves as husband and wife have entered into a lawful contract of marriage; (bb)That property acquired by a man and a woman who are capacitated to marry each other and who live exclusively with each other as husband and wife without the benefit of marriage or under void marriage, has been obtained by their joint efforts, work or industry.

(n)That a court, or judge acting as such, whether in the Philippines or elsewhere, was acting in the lawful exercise of jurisdiction; (o)That all the matters within an issue raised in a case were laid before the court and passed upon by it; and in like manner that all matters within an issue raised in a dispute submitted for arbitration were laid before the arbitrators and passed upon by them; (p)That private transactions have been fair and regular; (q)That the ordinary course of business has been followed; (r)That there was a sufficient consideration for a contract; (s)That a negotiable instrument was given or indorsed for a sufficient consideration; (t)That an endorsement of negotiable instrument was made before the instrument was overdue and at the place where the instrument is dated; (u)That a writing is truly dated; (v)That a letter duly directed and mailed was received in the regular course of the mail; (w)That after an absence of seven years, it being unknown whether or not the absentee still lives, he is considered dead for all purposes, except for those of succession. The absentee shall not be considered dead for the purpose of opening his succession till after an absence of ten years. If he disappeared after the age of seventy-five years, an absence of five years shall be sufficient in order that his succession may be opened.

Charms Haw 3-B

28

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

(cc)That in cases of cohabitation by a man and a woman who are not capacitated to marry each other and who have acquire properly through their actual joint contribution of money, property or industry, such contributions and their corresponding shares including joint deposits of money and evidences of credit are equal. library (dd)That if the marriage is terminated and the mother contracted another marriage within three hundred days after such termination of the former marriage, these rules shall govern in the absence of proof to the contrary: (1)A child born before one hundred eighty days after the solemnization of the subsequent marriage is considered to have been conceived during such marriage, even though it be born within the three hundred days after the termination of the former marriage. (2)A child born after one hundred eighty days following the celebration of the subsequent marriage is considered to have been conceived during such marriage, even though it be born within the three hundred days after the termination of the former marriage. (ee)That a thing once proved to exist continues as long as is usual with things of the nature; (ff)That the law has been obeyed; (gg)That a printed or published book, purporting to be printed or published by public authority, was so printed or published; (hh)That a printed or published book, purporting contain reports of cases adjudged in tribunals of the country where the book is published, contains correct reports of such cases; (ii)That a trustee or other person whose duty it was to convey real property to a particular person has actually conveyed it to him when such presumption is necessary to perfect the title of such person or his successor in interest; (jj)That except for purposes of succession, when two persons perish in the same calamity, such as wreck, battle, or conflagration, and it is not shown who died first, and there are no particular circumstances from which it can be inferred, the survivorship is determined from
Charms Haw 3-B

the probabilities resulting from the strength and the age of the sexes, according to the following rules: 1.If both were under the age of fifteen years, the older is deemed to have survived; 2.If both were above the age sixty, the younger is deemed to have survived; 3.If one is under fifteen and the other above sixty, the former is deemed to have survived; 4.If both be over fifteen and under sixty, and the sex be different, the male is deemed to have survived, if the sex be the same, the older; 5.If one be under fifteen or over sixty, and the other between those ages, the latter is deemed to have survived. (kk)That if there is a doubt, as between two or more persons who are called to succeed each other, as to which of them died first, whoever alleges the death of one prior to the other, shall prove the same; in the absence of proof, they shall be considered to have died at the same time. (5a) The legislature may provide for prima facie evidence of guilt provided there be a rational connection between the facts proved and the ultimate fact presumed. (e)That evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if produced; Requisites: 1. That evidence is material 2. That the party had the opportunity to produce the same; and 3. That the said evidence is available only to said party The presumption does not apply in the following instances: 1. The suppression is not wilful 2. The evidence withheld is merely corroborative or cumulative 3. The evidence is at the disposal of both parties

29

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

4. The suppression is an exercise of a privilege 5. Evidence is unnecessary (j)That a person found in possession of a thing taken in the doing of a recent wrongful act is the taker and the doer of the whole act; otherwise, that things which a person possess, or exercises acts of ownership over, are owned by him; Before an inference of guilt arising from possession of recently stolen goods can be made, the following basic facts need to be proved by the prosecution: 1. The crime was actually committed; 2. The crime was committed recently; 3. The stolen property was found in the possession of the accused; and 4. The accused is unable to satisfactorily explain his possession thereof For purposes of conclusively possession, it is necessary that: 1. The any 2. The 3. The proving

There must, however, be conclusive proof that a first notice was sent to the addressee as the presumption that official duty has been regularly performed does not apply to this situation. If, however, the postmaster certifies that such notice was sent, such presumption arises and overrides the contrary

(jj)That except for purposes of succession, when two persons perish in the same calamity, such as wreck, battle, or conflagration, and it is not shown who died first, and there are no particular circumstances from which it can be inferred, the survivorship is determined from the probabilities resulting from the strength and the age of the sexes, according to the following rules

Presumption of Survivorship: (Requisites) possession must be unexplained by innocent origin; possession must be fairly recent possession must be exclusive 1. The deaths occurred in a calamity 2. There are no particular circumstances from which it can be inferred that one died ahead of the other

(v)That a letter duly directed and mailed was received in the regular course of the mail; Requisites: 1. It must be proved that the letter was properly addressed with postage prepaid 2. That it was actually mailed If said letter was not returned to the sender, it is presumed that it was received by the addressee. Service of Pleadings by Mail: complete upon the expiration of 10 days after mailing, unless the court otherwise provides Service by Registered Mail: complete upon actual receipt by the addressee, but if he fails to claim his mail from the post office within 5 days from the date of first notice, the service is complete at the expiration of such time. Presumption of Survivorship Presumption of Simultaneity in deaths in cases of they are called to succeed each other It is not required that the parties perished in a calamity Applied only in questions of successional rights

Applies only where the deaths occurred during a calamity Applies to cases not involving successional rights

Sec. 4.No presumption of legitimacy or illegitimacy. There is no presumption of legitimacy of a child born after three hundred days following the dissolution of the marriage or the separation of the spouses. Whoever alleges the legitimacy or illegitimacy of such child must prove his allegation. (6) RULE 132

Charms Haw 3-B

30

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE A. EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES SECTION 1.Examination to be done in open court. The examination of witnesses presented in a trial or hearing shall be done in open court, and under oath or affirmation. Unless the witness is incapacitated to speak, or the questions calls for a different mode of answer, the answers of the witness shall be given orally. (1a) Sec.2.Proceedings to be recorded. The entire proceedings of a trial or hearing, including the questions propounded to a witness and his answers thereto, the statements made by the judge or any of the parties, counsel, or witnesses with reference to the case, shall be recorded by means of shorthand or stenotype or by other means of recording found suitable by the court. A transcript of the record of the proceedings made by the official stenographer, stenotypist or recorder and certified as correct by him shall be deemed prima facie a correct statement of such proceedings. (2a) To be admissible, the testimony of the witness must be given in open court, except that such requirement may be supplanted: a) In civil cases by depositions pursuant to and under the limitations of Rule 23 and 24 b) In criminal cases by depositions or conditional examinations or by records of the preliminary investigation The testimony of a witness in court cannot be considered self-serving since he can be subjected to cross-examination.

Self-serving evidence one made out of court and is excluded on the same ground as hearsay evidence, i.e., deprivation of the right of cross-examination Sec. 3.Rights and obligations of a witness. A witness must answer questions, although his answer may tend to establish a claim against him. However, it is the right 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; or (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. (3a, 19a) GR: A witness cannot refuse to answer questions material to the inquiry even if it may tend to establish a claim against him.

HOWEVER, summary procedures may be authorized by the Supreme Court in special cases, i.e., ejectment, violation of traffic laws, violation of rental law and other cases determined by the SC; and simplified procedures may be adopted by the SC which may provide that affidavits and counteraffidavits may be admitted in lieu of oral testimony.

EXC: A witness may validly refuse to answer in the following instances:

1. Under

The testimony of the witness should be elicited by questions of counsel.

Charms Haw 3-B

the right against selfincrimination, if his answer will tend to subject him to punishment for an offense; or

31

E
2. Under

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

the right against selfdegradation. If his answer will have a direct tendency to degrade his character, unless: a. Such question is directed to the very fact at issue or to a fact from which the fact at issue would be presumed, or b. It refers to his previous final conviction for an offense

her direct examination as the issue thereon was raised during the cross-examination. Hence, she did not waive the privilege against selfincrimination of her own volition or by acts imputable to her.

Unless otherwise provided by law refers to immunity statutes wherein the witness is granted immunity from criminal prosecution for offenses admitted in his testimony (e.g. RA 1379 and PD 749)

The right against self-incrimination is available in criminal, civil or administrative cases. Classes of Immunity Statutes:

The right against self-incrimination which may be invoked by the accused may be with reference to the offense involved in the same case wherein he is charged OR to an offense for which he may be charged and tried in another case.

1. Use immunity prohibits the use of

the witness compelled testimony and its fruits in any manner in connection with the criminal prosecution of the witness 2. Transactional immunity grants immunity to the witness from prosecution for an offense to which his compelled testimony relates

With respected to the right against selfincrimination which may be invoked by a witness the offense involved is one for which he may be tried in another case.

Beltran case: it was the accused himself who opened the issue on his direct examination. As an accused, he could even have refused to testify at all without any unfavourable presumption being drawn against him. Since he chose to be a witness and went to the extent of testifying on the matter of the handwriting, he thereby waived the right against selfincrimination on the issue, hence, he could then be cross-examined thereon just like any other witness.

Where the statute grants only use immunity, merely testifying and/or producing evidence does not render the witness immune from prosecution despite his invocation of the right against self-incrimination. He is merely saved from the use of such statements or evidence which he had been compelled to provide notwithstanding his having seasonably invoked said right against self-incrimination.

The right against self-incrimination is granted in favor of individuals, hence, a corporation cannot invoke that privilege as the questioned testimony can come only from a corporate officer or employee who has a personality distinct from that of the corporation. Sec. 4.Order in the examination of an individual witness. The order in which the individual witness may be examined is as follows; (a)Direct examination by the proponent;

Bermudez case: The testimony was given by the complainant who, unlike an accused person, could not refuse to testify without an unfavourable inference being drawn against her. Furthermore, when she testified, she did not open the issue with respect to the letters in
Charms Haw 3-B

32

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

(b)Cross-examination by the opponent; (c)Re-direct examination by the proponent; (d)Re-cross-examination by the opponent. (4) Sec. 5.Direct examination. Direct examination is the examination-in-chief of a witness by the party presenting him on the facts relevant to the issue. (5a) Sec. 6.Cross-examination; its purpose and extent. Upon the termination of the direct examination, the witness may be crossexamined by the adverse party as to many matters stated in the direct examination, or connected therewith, with sufficient fullness and freedom to test his accuracy and truthfulness and freedom from interest or bias, or the reverse, and to elicit all important facts bearing upon the issue. (8a) Sec. 7.Re-direct examination; its purpose and extent. After the cross-examination of the witness has been concluded, he may be reexamined by the party calling him, to explain or supplement his answers given during the crossexamination. On re-direct-examination, questions on matters not dealt with during the cross-examination, may be allowed by the court in its discretion. (12) Sec. 8.Re-cross-examination. Upon the conclusion of the re-direct examination, the adverse party may re-cross-examine the witness on matters stated in his re-direct examination, and also on such other matters as may be allowed by the court in its discretion. (13) American Rule cross-examination must be confined to the matters inquired about in the direct examination HOWEVER, where the witness is an unwilling or hostile witness so declared by the court or is an adverse party, the cross-examination shall only be on the subject matter of his examination-inchief.

When the question which assumes facts not on record is asked on cross-examination, it is objectionable for being misleading; if on direct examination, it is objectionable for lack of basis.

GR: When the cross-examination is not and cannot be done or completed due to causes attributable to the party who offered the witness, the uncompleted testimony is thereby rendered incompetent and should be stricken from the record.

EXC: Where in a criminal case the prosecution witness was extensively cross-examined on the essential elements of the crime and what remained for further cross-examination was the matter of price or reward which was treated therein as merely an aggravating circumstance, his failure to appear for further crossexamination thereon will not warrant the striking out of his direct examination, especially since further cross-examination could not be conducted due to the subsequent death of said witness, a circumstance not attributable to the prosecution. Sec. 9.Recalling witness. After the examination of a witness by both sides has been concluded, the witness cannot be recalled without leave of the court. The court will grant or withhold leave in its discretion, as the interests of justice may require. (14) GR: Recalling of a witness is discretionary.

English Rule a witness may be crossexamined not only upon matters testified to by him on his direct examination, but also on all matters relevant to the issue

The rule obtaining in this jurisdiction on the subject is more in accord with the English Rule.
Charms Haw 3-B

EXC: In the following instances, recalling is a matter of right:

33

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

1. Where such examination has not been concluded; OR 2. If the recall of the witness was expressly reserved by a party with the approval of the court Sec. 10.Leading and misleading questions. A question which suggests to the witness the answer which the examining party desires is a leading question. It is not allowed, except: (a)On cross examination; (b)On preliminary matters; (c)When there and intelligible ignorant, or a feeble mind, or is a difficulty is getting direct answers from a witness who is child of tender years, or is of a deaf-mute;

misled the party into calling him to the witness stand. The unwilling or hostile witness so declared, or the witness who is an adverse party, may be impeached by the party presenting him in all respects as if he had been called by the adverse party, except by evidence of his bad character. He may also be impeached and cross-examined by the adverse party, but such cross-examination must only be on the subject matter of his examination-in-chief. (6a, 7a) Sec. 13.How witness impeached by evidence of inconsistent statements. Before a witness can be impeached by evidence that he has made at other times statements inconsistent with his present testimony, the statements must be related to him, with the circumstances of the times and places and the persons present, and he must be asked whether he made such statements, and if so, allowed to explain them. If the statements be in writing they must be shown to the witness before any question is put to him concerning them. (16) Leading Question one which suggests to the witness the answer desired

(d)Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or (e)Of a witness who is an adverse party or an officer, director, or managing agent of a public or private corporation or of a partnership or association which is an adverse party. A misleading question is one which assumes as true a fact not yet testified to by the witness, or contrary to that which he has previously stated. It is not allowed. (5a, 6a, and 8a) Sec. 11.Impeachment of adverse party's witness. A witness may be impeached by the party against whom he was called, by contradictory evidence, by evidence that his general reputation for truth, honestly, or integrity is bad, or by evidence that he has made at other times statements inconsistent with his present, testimony, but not by evidence of particular wrongful acts, except that it may be shown by the examination of the witness, or the record of the judgment, that he has been convicted of an offense. (15) Sec. 12.Party may not impeach his own witness. Except with respect to witnesses referred to in paragraphs (d) and (e) of Section 10, the party producing a witness is not allowed to impeach his credibility. A witness may be considered as unwilling or hostile only if so declared by the court upon adequate showing of his adverse interest, unjustified reluctance to testify, or his having

Misleading Question one which assumes facts not in evidence or without sufficient basis or which assumes testimony or proof which has not been given

Testimony on direct examination elicited through leading questions of counsel for the proponent has little probative value.

GR: A party who voluntarily offers the testimony of a witness in the case is, as a rule, bound by the testimony of the said witness.

EXC: 1. In the case of a hostile witness; or

Charms Haw 3-B

34

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

2. Where the witness is the adverse party or the representative of a juridical person which is the adverse party 3. When the witness is not voluntarily offered but is required by law to be presented by the proponent, as in the case of subscribing witnesses to a will

S witness is impeached by prior inconsistent statements by laying the predicate, that is: 1. By confronting him with such statements, with circumstances under which they were made; 2. By asking him whether he made such statements; and 3. By giving him a chance to explain the inconsistency

A party can impeach the adverse partys witness by: 1. Contradictory evidence 2. Evidence of prior inconsistent statements 3. Evidence of bad character 4. Evidence of bias, interest, prejudice or incompetence It is, however, believed that if the prior inconsistent statement appears in a deposition of the adverse party, and not a mere witness, that adverse party who testifies may be impeached without laying the predicate, as such prior statements are in the nature of admissions of said adverse party.

A party can impeach his own witness only by: 1. Evidence contradictory to his testimony; or 2. Evidence of prior inconsistent statements

Sec. 14.Evidence of good character of witness. Evidence of the good character of a witness is not admissible until such character has been impeached. (17) Sec. 15.Exclusion and separation of witnesses. On any trial or hearing, the judge may exclude from the court any witness not at the time under examination, so that he may not hear the testimony of other witnesses. The judge may also cause witnesses to be kept separate and to be prevented from conversing with one another until all shall have been examined. (18)

HOWEVER, in the case of hostile witnesses, adverse party witnesses or involuntary witnesses, they can also be impeached by other modes of impeachment, aside from contradictory statements and prior inconsistent statements made by them.

Contradictory Evidence refers to other testimony of the same witness, or other evidence presented by him in the same case, but not the testimony of another witness

The power of exclusion applies only to the witnesses and not to parties in a civil case.

Parties have a right to be present at the trial.

Prior inconsistent Statements refer to statements, oral or documentary, made by the witness sought to be impeached on occasions other than the trial in which he is testifying

If the witness violates the order of exclusion, the court may bar him from testifying or give little weight to his testimony, aside from his liability for contempt.

Charms Haw 3-B

35

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

Sec. 16.When witness may refer to memorandum. A witness may be allowed to refresh his memory respecting a fact, by anything written or recorded by himself or under his direction at the time when the fact occurred, or immediately thereafter, or at any other time when the fact was fresh in his memory and knew that the same was correctly written or recorded; but in such case the writing or record must be produced and may be inspected by the adverse party, who may, if he chooses, cross examine the witness upon it, and may read it in evidence. So, also, a witness may testify from such writing or record, though he retain no recollection of the particular facts, if he is able to swear that the writing or record correctly stated the transaction when made; but such evidence must be received with caution. (10a) Revival of Present Memory 1st sentence; applies if the witness remembers the facts regarding his entries and is entitled to greater weight

witness, it may be inspected by the adverse party. (9a) B. AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF DOCUMENTS Sec. 19.Classes of Documents. For the purpose of their presentation evidence, documents are either public or private. Public documents are: (a)The written official acts, or records of the official acts of the sovereign authority, official bodies and tribunals, and public officers, whether of the Philippines, or of a foreign country; (b)Documents acknowledge before a notary public except last wills and testaments; and (c)Public records, kept in the Philippines, of private documents required by law to the entered therein. All other writings are private. (20a) The classification of documents into official, public, commercial and private under the RPC is different. Under the rules of evidence, official documents are public documents.

Revival of Past Recollection 2nd sentence; applies where the witness does not recall the facts involved, and is entitled to lesser weight

Where the witness has testified independently of or after his memory has been refreshed by a memorandum of the events in dispute, such memorandum is not admissible as corroborative evidence, since a witness may not be corroborated by any written statement prepared wholly by him. Sec. 17.When part of transaction, writing or record given in evidence, the remainder, the remainder admissible. When part of an act, declaration, conversation, writing or record is given in evidence by one party, the whole of the same subject may be inquired into by the other, and when a detached act, declaration, conversation, writing or record is given in evidence, any other act, declaration, conversation, writing or record necessary to its understanding may also be given in evidence. (11a) Sec. 18.Right to respect writing shown to witness. Whenever a writing is shown to a
Charms Haw 3-B

GR: Public documents generally include notarial documents and are admissible in evidence without the necessity of preliminary proof as to its authenticity and due execution.

EXC: Where a special rule of law requires proof thereof despite its being a document acknowledged in accordance with Section 30 as in the case of the probate of notarial wills where the testimony of the attesting witnesses are still required for its probate.

While public records, kept in the Philippines of private writings are also public documents, under Section 19(c) of the same Rule, the public record is not the writing itself but the

36

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

public record thereof. It does not make the private writing itself a public document so as to make it admissible without authentication.

or the court, with writings admitted or treated as genuine by the party against whom the evidence is offered, or proved to be genuine to the satisfaction of the judge. (23a) In addition to these rules, American jurisprudence also gives the following:

A claim for the enforcement of a foreign judgment can be brought only before the regular courts and not in an administrative agency.

1. Doctrine of Self-Authentication

A foreign judgment is a public writing under Section 19(a), and must be proved in accordance with Sections 24 and 25 of the same Rule.

where the facts in the writing could only have been known by the writer 2. Rule of Authentication of the Adverse Party where the reply of the adverse party refers to and affirms the transmittal to him and his receipt of the letter in question, a copy of which the proponent is offering as evidence

Sec. 20.Proof of private document. Before any private document offered as authentic is received in evidence, its due execution and authenticity must be proved either: (a)By anyone who saw the document executed or written; or (b)By evidence of the genuineness of the signature or handwriting of the maker. Any other private document need only be identified as that which it is claimed to be. (21a) Sec. 21.When evidence of authenticity of private document not necessary. Where a private document is more than thirty years old, is produced from the custody in which it would naturally be found if genuine, and is unblemished by any alterations or circumstances of suspicion, no other evidence of its authenticity need be given. (22a) Sec. 22.How genuineness of handwriting proved. The handwriting of a person may be proved by any witness who believes it to be the handwriting of such person because he has seen the person write, or has seen writing purporting to be his upon which the witness has acted or been charged, and has thus acquired knowledge of the handwriting of such person. Evidence respecting the handwriting may also be given by a comparison, made by the witness
Charms Haw 3-B

Authentication of required when:

a Document

is

NOT

1. The writing is an ancient document under Section 21; 2. The writing is a public document or record under Section 19; 3. It is a notarial document acknowledged, proved or certified in accordance with Section 30; or 4. The authenticity and due execution of the document has been expressly or impliedly admitted by a failure to deny the same under oath as in the case of actionable documents under Section 8 of Rule 8.

The authentication and due execution of a private document are proved, inter alia, by evidence of the genuineness of the handwriting of the maker. Such handwriting, in turn, is proved by:

1. A witness who actually saw the person writing the instrument 2. A witness familiar with such handwriting and who can give his opinion thereon, such opinion being an exception to the opinion rule

37

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

3. A comparison by the court of the questioned handwriting and admitted genuine specimens thereof 4. Expert evidence Sec. 23.Public documents as evidence. Documents consisting of entries in public records made in the performance of a duty by a public officer are prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated. All other public documents are evidence, even against a third person, of the fact which gave rise to their execution and of the date of the latter. (24a) Sec. 24.Proof of official record. The record of public documents referred to in paragraph (a) of Section 19, when admissible for any purpose, may be evidenced by an official publication thereof or by a copy attested by the officer having the legal custody of the record, or by his deputy, and accompanied, if the record is not kept in the Philippines, with a certificate that such officer has the custody. If the office in which the record is kept is in foreign country, the certificate may be made by a secretary of the embassy or legation, consul general, consul, vice consul, or consular agent or by any officer in the foreign service of the Philippines stationed in the foreign country in which the record is kept, and authenticated by the seal of his office. (25a) Sec. 25.What attestation of copy must state. Whenever a copy of a document or record is attested for the purpose of evidence, the attestation must state, in substance, that the copy is a correct copy of the original, or a specific part thereof, as the case may be. The attestation 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. (26a) Sec. 26.Irremovability of public record. Any public record, an official copy of which is admissible in evidence, must not be removed from the office in which it is kept, except upon order of a court where the inspection of the record is essential to the just determination of a pending case. (27a) Requisites for the Admissibility of a Copy of a Foreign Official Document are the following:

1. It must be attested by the officer having legal custody of the records or by his deputy; and 2. It must be accompanied by a certificate of the Philippine diplomatic or consular representative to the foreign country certifying that such attesting officer has the custody of the document (this requirement is not a mere technicality but is intended to justify the giving of full faith and credit to the genuineness of a document in a foreign country.)

Section 26 refers only to a public record an official copy of which could be made available to the interested party and is admissible in evidence. Sec. 27.Public record of a private document. An authorized public record of a private document may be proved by the original record, or by a copy thereof, attested by the legal custodian of the record, with an appropriate certificate that such officer has the custody. (28a) Sec. 28.Proof of lack of record. A written statement signed by an officer having the custody of an official record or by his deputy that after diligent search no record or entry of a specified tenor is found to exist in the records of his office, accompanied by a certificate as above provided, is admissible as evidence that the records of his office contain no such record or entry. (29) Sec. 29.How judicial record impeached. Any judicial record may be impeached by evidence of: (a) want of jurisdiction in the court or judicial officer, (b) collusion between the parties, or (c) fraud in the party offering the record, in respect to the proceedings. (30a) Sec. 30.Proof of notarial documents. Every instrument duly acknowledged or proved and certified as provided by law, 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. (31a) Public Document may be proved by: 1. The original copy

Charms Haw 3-B

38

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

2. Official publication thereof; or 3. A certified true copy thereof

the statement therein contained regarding the duration of illness and the cause of death are mere hearsay. Sec. 31.Alteration in document, how to explain. The party producing a document as genuine which has been altered and appears to have been altered after its execution, in a part material to the question in dispute, must account for the alteration. He may show that the alteration was made by another, without his concurrence, or was made with the consent of the parties affected by it, or was otherwise properly or innocent made, or that the alteration did not change the meaning or language of the instrument. If he fails to do that, the document shall not be admissible in evidence. (32a) Sec. 32.Seal. There shall be no difference between sealed and unsealed private documents insofar as their admissibility as evidence is concerned. (33a) Sec. 33.Documentary evidence in an unofficial language. Documents written in an unofficial language shall not be admitted as evidence, unless accompanied with a translation into English or Filipino. To avoid interruption of proceedings, parties or their attorneys are directed to have such translation prepared before trial. (34a) Under the 1987 Constitution, the official languages are Filipino and, until otherwise provided by law, English, with regional languages as auxiliary official languages in the region. C. OFFER AND OBJECTION Sec. 34.Offer of evidence. The court shall consider no evidence which has not been formally offered. The purpose for which the evidence is offered must be specified. (35) Sec. 35.When to make offer. As regards the testimony of a witness, the offer must be made at the time the witness is called to testify. Documentary and object evidence shall be offered after the presentation of a party's testimonial evidence. Such offer shall be done orally unless allowed by the court to be done in writing. (n)

Where a certified true copy is presented, Section 24 and 25 provide what should appear in the certification or attestation of said true copy and which must have the documentary stamp affixed thereto in order to be admissible, UNLESS, specifically exempted therefrom (ex. Baptismal or birth certificates of contracting parties to a marriage).

It is presumed that the requisite stamps have been affixed to the original copy of a document where only the carbon copies thereof are available.

Public instruments do not have uniform probative value. The probative value depends on the kind of document is presented in evidence.

There is no difference in the probative value between a public and private document. Distinction is only as to admissibility (i.e., public document is prima facie authentic and therefore is admissible).

While recognizing the primacy of a birth certificate as proof of the victims age, it held that in the absence of such evidence, the victims minority may be proved by other documentary evidence such as her baptismal certificate or other authentic records. A baptismal certificate is a private document. It is not proof of paternity. It is only proof of the fact that there was baptism. A death certificate is not proof of the cause of death. Its significance is for the presumption of death (rebuttable presumption; not conclusive). A death certificates probative value is confined only to the fact of death, and
Charms Haw 3-B

39

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

The literal import of Section 34 had therein been relaxed in the sense that evidence not formally offered can be admitted by the trial court provided the following requirements are present:

Sec. 38.Ruling. The ruling of the court must be given immediately after the objection is made, unless the court desires to take a reasonable time to inform itself on the question presented; but the ruling shall always be made during the trial and at such time as will give the party against whom it is made an opportunity to meet the situation presented by the ruling. The reason for sustaining or overruling an objection need not be stated. However, if the objection is based on two or more grounds, a ruling sustaining the objection on one or some of them must specify the ground or grounds relied upon. (38a) Sec. 39.Striking out answer. Should a witness answer the question before the adverse party had the opportunity to voice fully its objection to the same, and such objection is found to be meritorious, the court shall sustain the objection and order the answer given to be stricken off the record. On proper motion, the court may also order the striking out of answers which are incompetent, irrelevant, or otherwise improper. (n) Sec. 40.Tender of excluded evidence. If documents or things offered in evidence are excluded by the court, the offeror may have the same attached to or made part of the record. If the evidence excluded is oral, the offeror may state for the record the name and other personal circumstances of the witness and the substance of the proposed testimony. (n) The reservation of a ruling made by the court on an objection to the admissibility of evidence, without subsequently excluding the same, amounts to a denial of said objection. At any rate, the courts should consider the evidence only for the purpose for which it was offered. GR: The trial court should promptly rule upon the objections to enable the party objecting to meet the situation created by a denial of his objection. EXC: If the objecting party does not insist on such ruling during the trial, he cannot be heard to complain thereof for the first time on appeal

1. The same must have been duly identified by testimony duly recorded; and 2. The same must have been incorporated in the records of the case

Offer is made at the conclusion of evidence (object and documentary). Formal offer is usually made in writing, BUT, if the documents are not substantial in number, oral offer is sufficient. If a party presenting the evidence did not formally offer such evidence, the other party has the right (he may) offer such evidence. Sec. 36.Objection. Objection to evidence offered orally must be made immediately after the offer is made. Objection to a question propounded in the course of the oral examination of a witness shall be made as soon as the grounds therefor shall become reasonably apparent. An offer of evidence in writing shall be objected to within three (3) days after notice of the unless a different period is allowed by the court. In any case, the grounds for the objections must be specified. (36a) Sec. 37.When repetition of objection unnecessary. When it becomes reasonably apparent in the course of the examination of a witness that the question being propounded are of the same class as those to which objection has been made, whether such objection was sustained or overruled, it shall not be necessary to repeat the objection, it being sufficient for the adverse party to record his continuing objection to such class of questions. (37a)

Charms Haw 3-B

40

V I D E N C E

E V I E W E R

EXC to EXC: Where such act of the trial court has resulted in a serious prejudice to the substantial rights of the objecting party in which case the appellate court may consider that omission as reversible error. The trial courts should permit all exhibits presented by the parties, although not admitted, to be attached to the records so that, in case of appeal, the appellate court may be able to examine the same and determine the propriety of their rejection and includes, for the same reason and purpose, oral evidence which the trial court may have excluded or refused to admit. However, it has been held that where documentary evidence was rejected by the trial court and the offeror did not move that the same be attached to the record, the same cannot be considered by the appellate court, as documents forming no part of proofs before the appellate court cannot be considered in disposing of the case; otherwise, that would infringe upon the constitutional right of the adverse party to due process of law. Evidence submitted for one purpose may not be considered for any other purpose. The identification of documentary evidence is different from its formal offer. Identification of the evidence is made in the course of trial and marked as exhibits, and it is only when the proponent rests his case and formally offers the evidence that an objection thereto may be made. Any objection prior thereto is premature. An erroneous admission or rejection of evidence by the trial court is not a ground for a new trial or reversal of the decision if there are other independent evidence to sustain the decision, or if the rejected evidence, if it had been admitted, would not have changed the decision; otherwise, a new trial is warranted by reason of such erroneous ruling which goes into the merits of the case and would have affected the decision. GR: The rulings of the trial court on procedural questions and on admissibility of evidence during the course of a trial are interlocutory in nature and may not be the subject of separate appeals or review on certiorari. These are to be assigned as errors and reviewed in the appeal taken from the trial court on the merits of the case.
Charms Haw 3-B

EXC: If the ruling of the court would dispose of the case

41