EQUIPP REVIEW CENTER, INC.

813 CMFFI Bldg., R. Papa St., Sampaloc, Manila

Tel No.: (02) 734-9893 / 733-5584
Mobile No.: 09206139263
Email Add: equip_1997@yahoo.com
Evidence is the means, sanctioned by these rules, of
ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the truth
respecting a matter of fact.

Main Source of the Law on Evidence:

Rules of Court Rules 128-133 (134)

PROOF, defined- the result or the effect of evidence.

FACTUM PROBANDUM- the ultimate fact or the fact
sought to be established. It is the fact to be proved.
FACTUM PROBANS- factum probans is the evidentiary
fact or the fact by which the factum probans is to be
established
 1. Object or real or autoptic evidence or physical
evidence or tangible evidence- that which is
directly addressed to the senses of the court and
consists of tangible things exhibited in court.

Chain of Custody- the presenter of an object

evidence may be required to prove its chain of
custody, that is the people who took charge
thereof from its recovery to presentation in court
so that it may pass the process of authentication.
If the object evidence is easy to identify, mere
testimony of witness is sufficient.
 2. Testimonial evidence- that which is
submitted to the court through the testimony or
deposition of a witness. It is that which directly
comes out of the witnesss mouth, oral or
written, such as depositions and affidavits.
3. Relevant evidence- evidence having any value
in reason as tending to prove any matter
provable in an action.
4. Material evidence- evidence directed to prove
a fact in issue as determined by the rules of
substantive law and pleading.
 5. Competent evidence- evidence that is not
excluded by the rules, statute or the
Constitution.
6. Direct evidence- that which proves the fact in
dispute without the aid of any inference or
presumption.
7. Circumstantial evidence- the proof of fact or
facts from which, taken either singly or
collectively, the existence of the particular fact in
dispute may be inferred as a necessary or
provable consequence.
8. Cumulative evidence- evidence of the same
kind and to the same state of facts.
 9. Corroborative evidence- additional evidence of a
different character to the same point.
10. Expert evidence- the testimony of one
possessing in regard to a particular subject or
department of human activity, knowledge not usually
acquired by other persons.
11. Prima Facie Evidence- that which standing alone,
unexplained or uncontradicted, is sufficient to
maintain the proposition affirmed.
12. Primary evidence- that which the law regards as
affording the greatest certainty of the fact in question
13. Secondary evidence or Substitutionary Evidence-
that which is inferior to the primary evidence and is
permitted only when the best evidence is not
available.
14. Positive evidence- when a witness affirms that a
fact did or did not occur
 15. Negative evidence- when a witness states he did
not see or know of the occurrence of a fact.
16. Documentary evidence- it consists of writings or
any material containing letters, words, numbers,
figures, symbols or other modes of written
expressions offered as proof of their contents.
17. Electronic evidence- document or information
received, recorded, transmitted, stored, processed or
produced electronically.
18. Forgotten evidence- evidence which was not
presented in court because of oversight or
forgetfulness of a party or counsel.
19. Exculpatory evidence- that evidence which will
excuse a person from an alleged fault or crime.
20. Evidence Aliunde or Extraneous evidence-
evidence from outside or another source.
 21. Inculpatory evidence- are evidence which
has the tendency to implicate or incriminate a
person.
22. Self serving evidence- one made by the
party to favor his own interest. It is one made
by a party out of court.
23. Opinion evidence evidence given by an
ordinary person regarding of what he thinks.
24. Rebuttal evidence- evidence that will
contradict the other partys evidence
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.
Evidence is admissible when:
it is RELEVANT to the issue and
is NOT EXCLUDED BY THE LAW OR THE RULES
OF COURT.
 1. Conditional Admissibility of Evidence-
Evidence that will be admitted although
seemingly not admissible provided that its
relevancy would be shown in a later stage of the
trial.
2. Curative Admissibility of Evidence- Evidence
which will be admitted although normally
inadmissible because similar inadmissible
evidence has been introduced by the other party.
3. Multiple Admissibility of Evidence- when the
evidence not admissible for one purpose but
admissible for two or more purposes.
 PLAIN VIEW RULE- Under this doctrine, unlawful objects within
the plain view of an officer who has the right to be in the
position to have that view are subject to confiscation and are
admissible in evidence.

EXCLUSIONARY RULE- A rule of evidence that excludes evidence

obtained in violation of ones constitutional rights or obtained
through illegal means, such as those obtained by tortures and
the like.

FRUIT OF THE POSONOUS TREE- this doctrine states that once

the primary source the tree is shown to have been obtained
unlawfully, any derivative evidence, the fruit derived from it
(meaning the tree) is likewise not admissible. Thus, evidence
illegally obtained by the State should not be used to gain other
evidence because the illegally obtained evidence taints all
evidence subsequently obtained.

SILVER PLATTER RULE-The doctrine, now discredited (no longer

followed in the U.S.), that allowed evidence seized by state
officers in an illegal search and seizure to be used against the
accused in a criminal trial.
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.

COLLATERAL MATTERS- Are facts and

circumstances other then the facts in issue which
are being offered in evidence as bases for
inference as to the existence or non existence of
a fact in issue.
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 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.
 JUDICIAL NOTICE- the cognizance of certain
facts which judges may properly take act on
without proof because they already know
them.
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.
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)
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.
 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.
Object evidence (real evidence/autoptic
evidence) is tangible thing submitted to the
court for inspection, exhibition or
demonstration.
 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.
 When the subject of inquiry is the contents of a
document, no evidence shall be admissible other than
the original document itself, except in the following
cases:

(a)When the original has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be

produced in court, without bad faith on the part of the
offeror;
(b)When the original is in the custody or under the control of
the party against whom the evidence is offered, and the latter
fails to produce it after reasonable notice;
(c)When the original consists of numerous accounts or other
documents which cannot be examined in court without great
loss of time and the fact sought to be established from them
is only the general result of the whole; and
(d)When the original is a public record in the custody of a
public officer or is recorded in a public office
 Best Evidence Rule,(Primary Evidence) (Original
Document Rule) (Contents of Original Writing Rule)
defined- it is that rule which states that when the
subject of inquiry is the contents of a document, no
evidence shall be admissible other than the original
document itself.
It is that which affords the greatest certainty of a fact
in question.
The opposite of Best Evidence is Secondary Evidence
which is that evidence that is inferior to the primary
evidence is to prevent fraud.
The purpose of the rule requiring the production of
the best evidence is to prevent fraud.
Carbon paper copies are considered DUPLICATE
ORIGINALS.
Xeroxed copies/photocopies are not admissible
under the best evidence rule
 1. When the original has been lost or destroyed or
cannot be produced in court, without bad faith on the
part of the offeror;

2. 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;

3. When the original consists of numerous accounts

or other documents which cannot be examined in
court without great loss of time and the fact sought
to be established from them is only the general result
of the whole; and

4. When the original is a public record in the custody

of a public officer or is recorded in a public office.
 (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.
 Document, defined- a deed, instrument or other
duly authorized paper by which something is
proved, evidenced or set forth.
Secondary evidence (Substitutionary Evidence)
(Inferior Evidence) defined:
That which is admissible when the best evidence is
not available; or
Any evidence other than the original document itself;
or
One which is inferior to the best evidence.
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(any machine copy), or
by a recital of its contents in some authentic
document, or
by the testimony of witnesses in the order stated.
 Q: How can an original document be proved if
it is unavailable?
A: When 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.
 Q: When may secondary evidence be
admissible in evidence?
A: There must be proof of:
Due execution of the original;
Loss, destruction, or unavailability of all such
originals
Reasonable diligence and good faith in search for or
attempt produce the original.
 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.

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.

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.
When the terms of an agreement have been reduced to
writing, it is considered as containing all the terms
agreed upon and there can be, between the parties and
their successors in interest, no evidence of such terms
other than the contents of the written agreement.

However, a party may present evidence to modify,

explain or add to the terms of written agreement if he
puts in issue in his pleading:
(a)An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the
written agreement;
(b)The failure of the written agreement to express the true
intent and agreement of the parties thereto;
(c)The validity of the written agreement; or
(d)The existence of other terms agreed to by the parties or
their successors in interest after the execution of the
written agreement.
 Parole Evidence, defined- 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. It is also defined as any outside
or extrinsic evidence introduced to modify or explain or
add something to an agreement that was put in writing.

Parole Evidence Rule defined- a rule which states that

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 agreemeement. It means
that there can be no evidence of the terms of the written
agreement other than the terms of the written agreement.
A party may present evidence to modify, explain or
add to the terms of written agreement if he puts in
issue in his pleading:

1. An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection

in the written agreement;
2. The failure of the written agreement to express
the true intent and agreement of the parties
thereto;
3. The validity of the written agreement; or
4. The existence of other terms agreed to by the
parties or their successors in interest after the
execution of the written agreement.
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.

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.
Witness defined- a person who makes a statement to a
judicial tribunal on a question of fact.
Qualifications of child witness:
He must have capacity of observation
He must have capacity of recollection
He must have capacity of communication
Qualification of a Witness:
All persons who can perceive and perceiving, and
Can make known their perception to others may be witnesses.
 Biased witness- on who because of his relation to the
cause or to the parties is such that he has an incentive to
exaggerate or give false color to his statements, or to
suppress or pervert the truth, or to state what is false.

Competent witness- one who is not legally disqualified

from testifying in courts of justice, by reason of mental
incapacity, interests or the commission of crimes, or other
cause rendering him excluded from testifying.

Dishonest witness- a witness who professes to remember

things upon which he cannot be readily be contradicted
and who declares that he forgets those upon which he
would be open to contradiction. He usually takes refuge
behind the shelter afforded by the phrase I dont
remember.
 Instrumental witnesses- a witness who attests to
the execution of a will or testament and affirms
the formalities attendant to said execution.
Credible witness- one whose testimony is worth
of credit and belief. One who is not disqualified
to testify by mental incapacity, crime or other
causes.
Competent Witness- One who has all the
qualifications to testify. Thus he can perceive and
can make known his perception to others
regardless of political or religious belief or
interest and conviction of a crime.

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.
 Deaf and mutes are competent witnesses
when: they can understand the nature of an
oath, can comprehend facts they are going to
testify on, and can communicate their ideas
through qualified interpreter.
A mental retardate is still qualified witness if
he can make known his perceptions to
others.
 TEST OF COGNITION- when the accused
committed the crime while under complete
deprivation of intelligence. We follow this rule
in determining insanity.
TEST OF VOLITION- when the accused
committed the crime while there is total
deprivation of the freedom of will.
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.
This privilege can be lost by consent or failure to
object
 The policy of the law is to guard the
confidence of private life even at the risk of
occasional failure of justice.
To preserve harmony between the husband
and wife and family.
There is identity of interests between the
husband and the wife.
 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.
This privilege may be waived by cross examining the witness
 If one party to the alleged transaction is
precluded from testifying by death, insanity or
mental disabilities, the other party should not
take advantage of it by giving his own
uncontradicted account of what transpired.
This rule is designed to close the lips of the party
plaintiff when death has closed the lips of the
other party defendant, in order to remove from
the surviving party the temptation to falsehood
and the great possibility of fictitious and
exaggerated claims against the deceased.
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; (Marital
Communication Rule/Spousal Immunity
Rule/Husband and Wife Privilege)
 (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.
 Disqualification by reason of mental incapacity
or immaturity;
Disqualification by reason of marriage;
Disqualification by reason of death or insanity
of adverse party;
Disqualification by reason of privileged
communication between:
husband and wife;
attorney and client;
physician and patient;
priest and penitent;
public office (privilege of state secrets)
 Q: Who are those disqualified to become a
witness by reason of mental incapacity or
immaturity?

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.
Children whose mental maturity is such as to
render them incapable of perceiving the facts
respecting which they are examined and relating
them truthfully.
 PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION, defined-
communications received in confidence by a person
from another by reason of trust or intimate
relationship may not be revealed to the court.

DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF MARRIAGE,

defined- according to this rule, during their marriage,
neither the husband or 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 latters direct descendants or ascendants
Requisites of Marital or Spousal Immunity Rule:
There must be a valid marriage;
That marriage must be existing at the time of
the offer of the testimony;
The spouse is a party to the transaction
 The marital Communication Rule may be waived by:
Failure to object to the testimony
The spouse calls the other spouse to testify

Disqualification by Reason of Death or Insanity of

Adverse Party Rule, defined- according to this rule,
parties or assignors 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, cannot testify as to any matter of fact occurring
before the death of such deceased person or before
such person became of unsound mind.
 1. That 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;

2. The case is against the executor or administrator or

other representative of a person deceased or of unsound
mind;

3. The case is upon a claim or demand against the estate

of such deceased or unsound mind;

4. The testimony to be given is on a matter of fact

occurring before the death of the deceased person or
before such person became of unsound mine.
 a rule which state that the following person
persons cannot testify as to matters learned in
confidence in the following cases:

1. Husband or wife- during or after the marriage,

cannot be examined without the consent of the
other as to any communication received in
confidence by one from the other during the
marriage except in a civil case by one against the
other, or in a criminal case for a crime committed
by one against the other or the latters direct
descendants or ascendants.
2. 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
the attorneys secretary, stenographer, or clerk be
examined, without the consent of the client and his
employer concerning any fact the knowledge of which
has been acquired in such capacity;

3. Person authorized to practice medicine, surgery or

obstetrics- in a civil case cannot be examined, without
the consent of the patient as to any advice or treatment
given by him or any information which he may have
acquired in attending such patient in a professional
capacity, which information was necessary to enable
him to act in that capacity, and which would blacken
the reputation of the patient.
4. Minister or priest- without the consent of the
person making the confession, cannot be
examined as to any confession made or to 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; (This
privileged cannot be waived)

5. 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. (This privileged cannot be waived)
Requisites of Marital Privilege:

1. There was a valid marital relation;

2. The privilege is invoked with respect to
confidential communication between the
spouses during the marriage;
3. The spouse against whose the testimony is
offered has not given his consent.
 DQ By Reason of Marriage
1. May be invoked if one of the
spouses is a party to the action
2. Applicable only if the
marriage is existing at the time
the testimony is offered
3. It constitutes a total
prohibition against any
testimony for or against the
spouse of the witness.
DQ By Reason of Marital
Privilege
It may be claimed whether or
not the spouse is a party to the
action.
It can be claimed even after the
marriage has been dissolved.
Applies only to confidential
communication between the
spouses.
Q: What is the purpose of the Privileged
Communication between a lawyer and client?
A: To encourage clients to make full disclosure to his
lawyer in matters affecting his rights and obligations.
However, in order that communication between a
lawyer and his client may be privileged, it must be for a
lawful purpose or lawful end.

Q: What are the requisites of physician and patient

privilege?
A: They are:
the privilege is claimed in a civil case
the person against whom it is claimed is duly authorized to
practice medicine
the physician acquired the information while he was
attending to the patient in his professional capacity
the information was necessary for him to act in that
capacity
the information must be confidential, that is if disclosed
would blacken the reputation of the patient.
 No person may be compelled to testify
against his parents, other direct ascendants,
children or other direct descendants.
PARENTAL PRIVILEGE- parents cannot be
compelled to testify against his descendants;
while FILIAL PRIVILEGE means, witness cannot
be compelled to testify against his parents or
other direct ascendants
 The act, declaration or omission of a party as to a
relevant fact may be given in evidence against
him.

ADMISSION, defined- any statement of a fact by a

party against his interest or unfavorable to the
conclusion for which he contends or is
inconsistent with the facts alleged by him. It is a
statement of fact which does not involve an
acknowledgment of guilt or liability (this is the
more popular definition)
CONFESSION, defined- the declaration of an
accused expressly acknowledging his guilt of the
offense charged.
 An admission does not necessarily involve an
acknowledgement of guilt as in the case of
confession;
An admission may be expressed or tacit while
a confession is always express;
Admission may be made by third persons and
in certain cases admissible against a party,
while a confession can be made only by the
party himself, and in some instances are
admissible against his co-accused.
Q: What are the types of admissions?

A: They are:

Admission by a party
Admission by co partner or agent
Admission by co conspirator
Admission by privies
Admission by silence
 Flight from justice is an admission by
conduct. The wicked flees when no man
pursueth, but the innocent is as bold as a
lion.
 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 quasi-offenses
(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.
 .The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by
an act, declaration, or omission of another,
except as hereinafter provided.
This section is known as the RES INTER ALIOS
ACTA ALTERI NOCERE NON DEBET rule, which
means things done between strangers
should not injure those who are not parties to
them.
 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.

Q: What are the requisites of admission by a co partner or agent?

A: They are:
the act or declaration was made within the scope of his authority;
it was made during the existence of the partnership or agency;
the partnership or agency is proved by evidence other than such
act or declaration
 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.

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.
Q: Who is a privy?
A: He is one who derives his title to property from
another by purchase, conveyance or some other
modes.
 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.

Q: What is the basis for the rule on admission by

silence?
A: The instinct of man is to resist an accusation or
unfounded claim and defend himself, because it is
totally against human nature to remain silent and
say nothing in the face of false accusations.
 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.
CONFESSION- a categorical acknowledgement of
guilt made by the accused in a criminal case,
without an exculpatory statement or explanation.
JUDICIAL CONFESSION- is one made before a
court in which the case is pending and in the
course of the legal proceedings therein, and by
itself, can sustain a conviction.
 CORPUS DELICTI defined- it may refer to:
The body of the crime or;
The actual commission of the crime charged; or
The fact that a crime has been actually
committed.
 Confession must be express and categorical;
Confession must be intelligent;
Confession must be voluntarily given;
There must be no violation of article III Sec.
12 of the Constitution.
 INTERLOCKING CONFESSION- is a confession
in a criminal case so corroborative of each
other as to impose faith that they must have
a basis in fact. Where extrajudicial confession
have been made by several persons charged
with conspiracy and there could have been no
collusion with reference to several
confessions, the fact that the statements are
in all material respects identical is
confirmatory of the testimony of the
accomplice.
 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. (Res inter alios act alteri noceri non debet-Part II)

This section is known as SIMILAR ACT RULE OR PREVIOUS

CONDUCT RULE.
Q: What is the basis of the rule on similar act rule or
previous conduct rule or the res inter alios acta alteri
noceri non debet rule part 2?
A: The fact that a person has committed the same or
similar acts at some prior time does not mean that he
committed the same act in question.
 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.
 .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.

Q: This section is known as the TESTIMONIAL

KNOWLEDGE RULE. What is the testimonial
knowledge rule?
A: It means that the testimony of a witness must
be based on his personal knowledge as hearsays
are excluded.
Q: What is hearsay evidence?
A: It is evidence not of what the witness knows himself by
personal knowledge but of what he has heard from others.
Hearsay evidence as a general rule is not allowed. It is also
known as SECOND HAND EVIDENCE.

Q: What is double hearsay (multiple hearsay)?

A: The testimony of a person with respect to what was told
him by another who was not a witness to a fact but who only
obtained knowledge thereof from another.

Q: Why is hearsay evidence excluded?

A: It is excluded because the party against whom it is
presented is deprived of the right and opportunity to cross
examine the persons to whom the statement is attributed.
Q: Rule on the admissibility of an affidavit?
A: An affidavit is hearsay and hence not admissible
unless the affiant (maker) is presented in court.

Q: What is the DOCTRINE OF INDEPENDENTLY

RELEVANT STATEMENT?
A: It states that when the testimony is presented to
establish not the truth but only the tenor of the
statement or the fact that the statement was made, it is
not hearsay and hence admissible. Under this rule, only
the fact that such statements were made is relevant
and admissible, but the truth or even the falsity thereof
is not material.
 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.

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.
hanrovirtulaw library

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.
 Sec. 40.Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree. The
reputation or tradition existing in a family previous to the
controversy (ante litem motam), 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 rings, family portraits and the
like, may be received as evidence of pedigree.

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.

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.
 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.

Sec. 44.Entries in official records. Entries in official

records made in the 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.

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.
 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 writer of the statement in the
treatise, periodical or pamphlet is recognized in his profession or
calling as expert in the subject.

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.
Testimony Generally Confined To Personal Knowledge; Hearsay Excluded:
A witness can testify only to those facts he knows of his personal
knowledge that is, which are derived from his own perception, meaning
the testimony of the witness must be based on personal knowledge, not
on what he heard from others or what other people told him because what
he heard or what the others told him is hearsay.
Q: When is evidence hearsay?
A: An evidence is hearsay if 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.

Q: What is hearsay testimony?

A: A testimony offered against a party who
had no opportunity to cross-examine the
witness.
 Hearsay evidence may be admitted by failure
of the party to make timely objections.
Independently relevant Statement- a doctrine
which states that regardless of the truth or
falsity of a statement, the fact that it has
been made or relevant, the hearsay rule does
not apply but the statement may be shown.
The test to determine whether an evidence is
hearsay is whether the adverse party is
deprived of the opportunity to confront or
cross examine the witness against him.
 Dying Declaration;
declaration Against Interest;
Act or declaration About Pedigree;
Family reputation or Tradition Regarding
Pedigree;
Common Reputation;
Parts of the Res Gestae;
Entries in the Course of Business;
Entries in Official Record;
Commercial Lists and the Like;
Learned treatises.
 DYING DECLARATION (ANTE MORTEM
STATEMENT OR STAEMENT IN ARTICULO
MORTIS OR DECLARATION IN EXTREMIS) - is
the declaration of a person, made under the
consciousness of an impending death, maybe
received in any case wherein his death is the
subject of inquiry, as evidence of the cause
and surrounding circumstances of his death
 That death is imminent and the declarant is conscious
of that fact;
The declaration refers to the cause and surrounding
circumstances of such death;
The declaration relates to facts which the victim is
competent to testify to;
The declaration is offered in a case wherein the
declarants death is the subject of inquiry.
The declaration was made under the consciousness of
an impeding death
The declarant thereafter dies
 Q: Why is dying declaration admissible?

A: Because when a person is at the point of

death, every motive to falsehood is silenced
and the mind is induced by the most powerful
considerations to speak the truth. Truth sits
on the lips of dying men.
 DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST- this is the
declaration made by a deceased person, or
unable to testify, against the interest of the
declarant, if the fact asserted in the
declaration was at the time it was made so far
contrary to declarants 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.
1. That the declarant is dead or unable to
testify;
2. That it relates to a fact against the interest
of the declarant;
3. That at the time he made said declaration,
the declarant was aware that the same was
contrary to his interest;
4. The declarant had no motive to falsify and
believed such declaration to be true.
 the declarant is dead or unable to testify;
the declarant is related to the person whose
pedigree is subject of inquiry by birth or
marriage;
there is evidence to prove the relationship
other than such declaration;
that declaration was made ante litem motam
(prior to the controversy).
 There is controversy in respect to the
pedigree of any family member;
The reputation or tradition of the pedigree of
the subject person existed prior to the
controversy;
The witness testifying to the reputation or
tradition regarding the pedigree of the
person is also a member of the family of the
subject person.
 PARTS OF THE RES GESTAE- these are
statements made by a person while a startling
occurrence is taking place or immediately
prior or subsequent thereto with respect to
the circumstances thereof, may be given in
evidence. So also a statement accompanying
an equivocal act material to the issue and
giving it legal significance may be received as
part of the res gestae.
 Res Gestae refers to those exclamations or
statements made by either the participants,
victims, or spectators to a crime immediately
before, during or immediately after its
commission, when the circumstances are such
that the statements were made a spontaneous
reaction or utterance inspired by excitement of
the occasion and there was no opportunity for
the declarant to fabricate a false statement. The
statement is one uttered without reflection,
involuntarily, perhaps even without the
declarants awareness of having uttered the same.
 1. The statement must be spontaneous;
2. Made while a startling occurrence is taking
place or immediately prior or subsequent
thereto;
3. It must relate to the circumstances of the
startling occurrence.
 Dying declaration are made only after the
homicidal attack has been committed; but in res
gestae, the statement may precede accompany or
be made after the homicidal attack.
Dying declaration are made only by the victim;
while statements as part of res gestae may be
that of the killer himself or that of the third
person.
The trustworthiness of the dying declaration is
based upon its being given under an awareness
of impending death, while on res gestae has its
justification on the spontaneity of the statement.
 The person made an entry;
That person is either dead or unable to testify
The entries were made at or near the time of
the transaction
The entrant was in a position to know the
facts stated therein
The entries were made in his professional
capacity or performance of legal, moral or
religious duties.
 An entry was made by a person;
He is a public officer or one enjoined by law
to do so;
It was made in the performance of duty;
The entrant had sufficient knowledge of the
facts stated by him
1. Handwriting experts
2. Paraffin Tests
3. Medical Certificate
4. Polygraph Examination
5. Tape Recordings
6. DNA etc.
Q: What is the TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES
DOCTRINE?

A: It is a test to determine the reliability and even

admissibility of out of court identification of
accused. The factors as enumerated are:
1. The witness opportunity to view the criminal at
the time of the commission of the crime.
2. the level of certainty demonstrated by the
witness at the time of identification
3. The suggestiveness of the identification
process.
 Sec. 48.General rule. The opinion of
witness is not admissible, except as indicated
in the following sections.
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.
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.
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

Q: Distinguish character from reputation.

A: Character is what a man really is, reputation is what
other people a man say he is. As a general rule the
prosecution cannot prove the bad moral character of
the accused. However, if the accused in his defense
attempts to prove his good moral character, then the
prosecution can introduce evidence of his bad moral
character at the rebuttal stage.
 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.
BURDEN OF PROOF (ONUS PROBANDI),
defined- it is the duty of a party to present
evidence on the facts in issue necessary to
establish his claim or defense.
 TYPE OF PROCEEDINGS QUANTUM OF PROOF
REQUIRED
1. Civil Cases Preponderance of
Evidence
2. Administrative Cases Substantial Evidence

3. Criminal Cases Proof Beyond

Reasonable Doubt
 PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE- it means that
the testimony adduced by one side is more
credible and conclusive than that of the other, or
the evidence as a whole, adduced by one side is
superior to the other. It is not meant the mere
numerical array of witnesses, but it means the
weight, credit and value of the aggregate
evidence on either side. Preponderance of
evidence means evidence which is of greater
weight or more convincing than the other.

SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE- such relevant evidence

as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate
to support a conclusion.
 Burden of Proof Burden of Evidence

1. Burden of proof does not shift Burden of evidence shifts from one
because it remains with the party party to another
upon whom it is imposed

2. Burden of proof is determined by Burden of evidence is determined by

the pleadings filed by the party the development at the trial
 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 such declaration, act or omission, be
permitted to falsify it:
This is known as: ESTOPPEL IN PAIS
 (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.
This is known as: ESTOPPEL BY DEED

Q: What is conclusive presumption?

A: It is an inference which the law makes so
peremptory that it will not allow such inference to be
overturned by any contrary proof however strong.
Conclusive presumption is also known as presumption
juris et de jure.

Q: What is disputable presumption?

A: It is a presumption which stands as true unless
rebutted by contrary evidence. This is also known as
presumption juris tantum.
 The following presumptions are satisfactory if
uncontradicted, but may be contradicted and
overcome by other evidence:
(a)That a person is innocent of crime or wrong;
(b)That an unlawful act was done with an unlawful intent;
(c)That a person intends the ordinary consequences of
his voluntary act;
(d)That a person takes ordinary care of his concerns;
(e)That evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if
produced;
(f)That money paid by one to another was due to the
latter;
 (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;
(m)That official duty has been regularly performed;
(w)That after an absence of seven years, (7) 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 (10). If he
disappeared after the age of seventy-five
years, an absence of five years (5) shall be
sufficient in order that his succession may be
opened.
 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 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.
aw 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.
 (ff)That the law has been obeyed;
(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:
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)
 Presumption of Law- is known as presumption presumtiones
juris. They are the conclusive (juris et de jure) and disputable
presumptions (presumption juris tantum).

Presumption of fact is known as presumtiones hominis

Q: Mention some common and well recognized presumptions by

jurisprudence.
A: They are:

1. A man and a woman living together are married.

2. That every person is of sound mind as sanity is presumed and
not insanity.
3. Good faith is always presumed and not bad faith.
4. That a person is potent because impotency being an
abnormality is not presumed.
 Q: What is the doctrine of STALE DEMANDS?

A: It is the failure or neglect for an

unreasonable and unexplained length of time
to do that which, by exercising due diligence,
could or should have been done earlier, thus
giving rise to a presumption that the party
entitled to assert it has abandoned or
declined to assert it. The doctrine of stale
demands is also known as LACHES.
 TYPE OF PROCEEDINGS QUANTUM OF PROOF
REQUIRED
1. Civil Cases Preponderance of Evidence

2. Administrative Cases, Substantial Evidence

Labor Cases
3. Criminal Cases Proof Beyond Reasonable
Doubt
4. Other Cases Clear and Convincing
Evidence
 PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE- it means that the testimony
adduced by one side is more credible and conclusive than that of
the other, or the evidence as a whole, adduced by one side is
superior to the other. It is not meant the mere numerical array of
witnesses, but it means the weight, credit and value of the
aggregate evidence on either side.

SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE- such relevant evidence as a reasonable

mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.

CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE- is evidence more than

preponderance of evidence but less than proof beyond
reasonable doubt. It is the quantum required to prove insanity,
paternity or filiation, self defense among others.
 Burden of Proof Burden of Evidence

1. Burden of proof does not shift Burden of evidence shifts from one
because it remains with the party party to another
upon whom it is imposed

2. Burden of proof is determined by Burden of evidence is determined by

the pleadings filed by the party the development at the trial
 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 call for a different mode of answer, the answers of
the witness shall be given orally.

Q: What is an oath?
A: A form of attestation by which a person signifies that he
is bound in conscience and that in case he does not tell the
truth divine retribution would follow against him.

Q: What is an affirmation?
A: A declaration instead of an oath that a person will tell the
truth.
 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.
 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
This is the right of the person against self incrimination.
But it is not self executing or automatically operational.
It must be claimed. Otherwise it is considered waived, as
by failure to claim it at the appropriate time. Hence, the
accused must actively invoke it. The proper time to
invoke it is when a question calling for incriminating
answer is asked. Note also that it applies to testimonial
compulsion only.
(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.
 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; (Also known as
EXAMINATION IN
CHIEF)
(b)Cross-examination by the opponent;
(c)Re-direct examination by the proponent;
(d)Re-cross-examination by the opponent.

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.

Sec. 6.Cross-examination; its purpose and extent. Upon

the termination of the direct examination, the witness may
be cross-examined 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.
Q: What is Laying the Predicate?
A: A process of cross examining the witness by first
laying a ground upon cross examination, and if denied
by the witness, then by introducing evidence of
contradictory statements to impeach him.

Q: What is the English Rule on Cross Examination?

A: Under this rule, a witness maybe examined not only
upon matters testified to by him on his direct
examination, but also upon on all matters relevant to
the issue. We follow this style of cross examination.
 Sec. 7.Re-direct examination; its purpose and extent.
After the cross-examination of the witness has been
concluded, he may be re-examined by the party calling
him, to explain or supplement his answers given during
the cross-examination. On re-direct-examination,
questions on matters not dealt with during the cross-
examination, may be allowed by the court in its discretion.

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.
Rebuttal Evidence and Sur Rebuttal Evidence

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.
 A question which suggests to the witness the
answer which the examining party desires is a
LEADING QUESTION. It is not allowed, except:
library
(a)On cross examination;
(b)On preliminary matters;
(c)When there is a difficulty is getting direct and
intelligible answers from a witness who is ignorant, or a
child of tender years, or is of feeble mind, or a deaf-
mute;
(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.
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.
 Except with respect to witnesses referred to
in paragraphs d (unwilling or hostile witness)
and e (witness who is adverse party) 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 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.
 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. (This
section is known as LAYING THE PREDICATE)
 Q: State the steps by which a witness may be
impeached by prior inconsistent statements.
A: They are:
SHOW to the witness the statement in writing.
RELATE to the witness the statement with the
circumstances of time, persons and places.
ASK the witness if he made those statements.
EXPLAINATION is demanded of the witness
regarding the alleged inconsistencies.
 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.

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.
 1. 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 (This is known as
Present Recollection Revived); 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. 2. 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 (This is known as Past Recollection Recorded).
 . 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. (This is known as the OPEN YOUR
DOOR POLICY OR THE COMPLETENESS RULE).
 Q: State the Open Door Policy or
Completeness Rule of the law on evidence.
A: It states 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
 Sec. 18.Right to respect writing shown to
witness. Whenever a writing is shown to a
witness, it may be inspected by the adverse
party.
 1. Direct examination by the proponent-
direct examination is the examination in chief
of a witness by the party presenting him on
the facts relevant to the issue.

2. Cross examination- a mode of procedure

to test the truth of the statements made by a
witness under direct examination by testing
the recollection, veracity, accuracy, honesty
and bias or prejudice of a witness, and
exhibit the improbabilities of his testimonies.
 3. Re-direct examination- a procedure to
meet and answer the cross examination, to
explain or supplement statements made on
cross examination which tend to create
doubts and to contradict matters drawn forth
on direct examination.

4. Re-cross examination- a procedure by

which a party re-examines the witness on
matter stated in his re-direct examination.
 LEADING QUESTIONS, defined- it is a
question which suggests to the witness the
answer which the examining party desires to
hear. It is one by which the answer of a
witness may be rather an echo to the
question than a genuine recollection of
events. As a general rule leading questions
are NOT ALLOWED.
 On cross examination;
On preliminary matters;
When there is difficulty in getting from
ignorant or child witness, or deaf mute
witness a direct and intelligible answer.
Unwilling or hostile witness
Witness who is an adverse party
 MISLEADING QUESTION defined- it is one
which assumes as true a fact not yet testified
to by the witness, or contrary to that which
he has previously stated. Misleading
questions are not allowed.

 A party may impeach the witness against him

by:

Contradictory evidence;
Evidence of prior inconsistent statement;
Evidence of his bad character.
 Q: Under the law on evidence impeachment
of a witness means:
a. discrediting a witness
b. browbeating with the witness
c. removing the President of the Philippines
d. respecting the witness
 LAYING THE PREDICATE, defined- a rule of
evidence which ordains that before a witness can
be impeached by evidence that he has made at
other times statement inconsistent with his
present testimony, the statement must be related
to him, with the circumstances of the times and
the places and the persons present, and he must
be asked whether he made such statements and
if so, allowed to explain them. If the statement is
in writing, they must be shown to him before any
question is put to him concerning them.
 REVIVAL OF PRESENT MEMORY or PRESENT
RECOLLECTION REVIVED- a rule which
allows a witness to refer to a memorandum
for the purpose of refreshing his memory
respecting a fact provided:
That the memorandum has been written by him
or under his direction;
That it was written: When the fact occurred, or
immediately thereafter, or at anytime when the
fact was fresh in his memory and he knew that
the same was correctly stated.
 REVIVAL OF PRESENT RECOLLECTION or PAST
RECOLLECTION RECORDED- a rule which
allows a witness to testify from a
memorandum or writing, though he retains
no recollection of particular facts , if he is
able to swear that the writing correctly stated
the transaction when made.

 It may be proved:

By anyone who saw the document executed or

written; or
By evidence of the genuiness of the signature or
handwriting of the maker
 Q: What is OFFER OF EVIDENCE?
A: means the presentation or introduction of
evidence in court. The court shall consider no
evidence which has not been formally offered.
 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.
 PRIVATE DOCUMENTS- are every deed or
instrument executed by a private person without
the intervention of a public notary or other
persons legally authorized; by which some
disposition or agreement is proved, evidenced or
set forth.
COMMERCIAL DOCUMENT-any document defined
and regulated by the Code of Commerce
OFFICIAL DOCUMENT- a document which is
issued by a public official in the exercise of the
functions of his office.
PUBLIC DOCUMENT- (See above definition)
 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; library
(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.

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 (This is known
as ANCIENT DOCUMENT RULE)
 Q: What is an Ancient Document?
A: It is a document which is more than 30
years old found in the proper custody and
unblemished by any alteration or
circumstance of suspicion.
 Sec. 22.How genuineness of handwriting proved. The
handwriting of a person may be proved: 1. by any witness
who believes it to be the handwriting of such person
because he has seen the person write, or 2. by a witness
who 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 3. by a
comparison, made by the witness 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.

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.
 Q: What is prima facie evidence?
A: Evidence which standing alone
unexplained or uncontradicted, is sufficient
to maintain the proposition affirmed.
 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 1. an official
publication thereof or 2. by a copy attested by the officer having
the legal custody of the record, or 3. 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.

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.
 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.

Sec. 27.Public record of a private document. An authorized

public record of a private document may be proved 1. by the
original record, or 2. by a copy thereof, attested by the legal
custodian of the record, with an appropriate certificate that such
officer has the custody.

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.
 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.

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.
 Q: What is the effect of notarization?
A: It converts private documents into public
documents. Hence it becomes admissible in
evidence without further proof of its
authenticity.
 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.

Sec. 32.Seal. There shall be no difference between sealed and

unsealed private documents insofar as their admissibility as
evidence is concerned.

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.
 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.
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.

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 therefore shall become reasonably apparent.
An offer of evidence in writing shall be objected to within
three (3) days after notice unless a different period is
allowed by the court.
In any case, the grounds for the objections must be
specified.
 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.

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.
 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.

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.
 Q: What is the law on TENDER OF EXCLUDED
EVIDENCE? (Offer of Proof/Proffer of Evidence).
A: A procedure undertaken by a party normally
through a lawyer if the evidence is excluded by
the court wherein 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.
 In civil cases, the party having burden of
proof must establish his case by a
preponderance of evidence. In determining
where the preponderance or superior weight
of evidence on the issues involved lies, the
court may consider:
1. all the facts and circumstances of the case,
2. the witnesses' manner of testifying,
3. their intelligence,
4. their means and opportunity of knowing the facts
to which there are testifying,
 5. the nature of the facts to which they testify,
6. the probability or improbability of their
testimony,
7. their interest or want of interest, and
8. also their personal credibility so far as the same
may legitimately appear upon the trial.
9. The court may also consider the number of
witnesses, though the preponderance is not
necessarily with the greater number.
 Sec. 2. Proof beyond reasonable doubt. In a
criminal case, the accused is entitled to an acquittal,
unless his guilt is shown beyond reasonable doubt.
Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean such a
degree of proof, excluding possibility of error,
produces absolute certainly. Moral certainly only is
required, or that degree of proof which produces
conviction in an unprejudiced mind.

Sec. 3. Extrajudicial confession, not sufficient ground

for conviction. An extrajudicial confession made by
an accused, shall not be sufficient ground for
conviction, unless corroborated by evidence of corpus
delicti.
 Q: What are the requisites so that
extrajudicial confession may be valid?
A: They are:
It must be voluntary;
It must be made with the assistance of a lawyer who
is competent and independent;
It must be in writing and must be express.
 Sec. 4.Circumstantial evidence, when sufficient.
Circumstantial evidence is sufficient for conviction if:
(a)There is more than one circumstances;
(b)The facts from which the inferences are derived are
proven; and
(c)The combination of all the circumstances is such as to
produce a conviction beyond reasonable doubt.

Sec. 5.Substantial evidence. In cases filed before

administrative or quasi-judicial bodies, a fact may be
deemed established if it is supported by substantial
evidence, or that amount of relevant evidence which a
reasonable mind might accept as adequate to justify
a conclusion.
 Sec. 6.Power of the court to stop further evidence.
The court may stop the introduction of further
testimony upon any particular point when the
evidence upon it is already so full that more
witnesses to the same point cannot be reasonably
expected to be additionally persuasive. But this
power should be exercised with caution.

Sec. 7.Evidence on motion. When a motion is based

on facts not appearing of record the court may hear
the matter on affidavits or DEPOSITION presented by
the respective parties, but the court may direct that
the matter be heard wholly or partly on oral
testimony or depositions.
 Q: What is deposition?
A: It is the written testimony of a witness
given in the course of judicial proceedings in
advance of a trial or hearing upon oral
examination.

Q: What is an affidavit?
A: An affidavit is a statement of fact under
oath.
 Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt- in criminal
case, the accused is entitled to an acquittal,
unless his guilt is shown beyond reasonable
doubt. Proof beyond reasonable doubt does
not mean such a degree of proof as excluding
possibility of error, produces absolute
certainty. Moral certainty is required or that
degree of proof which produces conviction in
an unprejudiced mind
 An extrajudicial confession made by the
accused, shall not be sufficient ground for
conviction unless corroborated by evidence of
corpus delicti.

CORPUS DELICTI- corpus delicti means that a

crime has been committed. It is not correct to
say that corpus delicti refers to the body of a
murdered person.
 SPECIFIC CRIME CORPUS DELICTI

1. Murder, homicide and Body of the dead victim or

kindred kind the fact of death
2. Arson Property burned or the fact
of burning
3. Theft Fact of lost (stolen property
plus felonious taking)

4. Illegal possession of Fact of possessing without

firearm license (existence of
unlicensed F/A with animus
possidendi)
 Credibility of witness- refers to the integrity, disposition and
intention to tell the truth in the testimony he has given.

Falsus In Uno Falsus in Omnibus- It literally means false in one

thing-false in everything. It refers to that principle where on one
point, the witness has lied, his testimony upon another points
may be disregarded. This is no longer followed in the
Philippines. The modern trend of jurisprudence is to the effect
that the testimony of a witness maybe believed in part and
disbelieved in part, depending upon the corroborative evidence
and the probabilities and improbabilities of the case.

Alibi, defined- known as the weakest defense in a criminal case.

It is an averment that the accused was at another place for such
period of time that it was impossible for him to have been at the
place where the act was committed at the time of its
commission.
 Alibi may be given strength to acquit the
accused if:

Where no positive or proper identification has been

made by the witnesses of the offender;
Where the prosecutions evidence is weak and
unsatisfactory.
 Q: When is circumstantial evidence adequate
to support a conviction?
A: Circumstantial evidence is sufficient for
conviction if:

1. There is more than one circumstance;

2. The facts from which the inferences are
derived are proven; and
3. The combination of all the circumstances is
such as to produce a conviction beyond
reasonable doubt.
 EQUIPOISE RULE, defined- where the inculpatory
circumstances are capable of two inferences, one which is
consistent with the presumption of innocence and the
other compatible with the finding of guilt, the court must
acquit the accused because the evidence does not fulfill
the test of moral certainty and therefore insufficient to
sustain a judgment of conviction. It may also be defined as
where the evidence of the parties in a criminal case is
evenly balanced, the constitutional presumption of
innocence should tilt the scales in favor of the accused and
he should be acquitted.

Equiponderance of Evidence Rule- when the scale shall

stand upon equipoise and there is nothing in the evidence
which shall incline it to one side or the other, the court will
find for the defendant.
COMPILED BY:
Mr. Makamasa A. Gapit
FOR:
Pamantasan Ng Lungsod Ng
Muntinlupa
De La Salle University Dasmarias
University of Perpetual Help Dalta
Las Pias
Emilio Aguinaldo College
Philippine College of Criminology
Lyceum of Alabang
-WHILE UNDER THE WARM and
PASSIONATE EMBRACES OF-
Ms. Emma Lee Bunton
St. Theresas Primary School
Sylvia Young Theatre School
Marylebone
REFERENCES:
Generoso, E.B., Evidence for
Everybody, Central Bookstore
Ricardo, Francisco Evidence
1996 Edition Central Bookstore
Bernardo, Oscar Evidence
Annotated, National Bookstore
MORENO, FEDERICO, Philippine
Legal Dictionary Central
Bookstore
Supreme Court Reports
Annotated Central Bookstore
FIAT JUSTITIA RUAT CAELUM
SOLI DEO GLORIA