RULES ON EVIDENCE

RULE 128 a necessary or probable consequence ( 5

GENERAL PROVISIONS Moran, Remedial Law Review, p. 2 )
f) Primary or best and secondary evidence –
primary or best evidence is that which the
Q – WHAT IS EVIDENCE?
law regards as affording the greatest
A – Evidence is the means, sanctioned by the
certainty of the fact in question, while
Revised Rules of Court, of ascertaining to a
secondary evidence is that which is inferior
judicial proceeding the truth respecting a
to the primary evidence and is permitted by
matter of fact (Sec. 1, Rule 128)
the law only when the best evidence is not
available ( 5 Moran, op. cit., p. 3 )
Q – DEFINE THE FOLLOWING TERM:
g) Positive and negative evidence – evidence
a) Rule of Evidence
is positive when the witness affirms that a
b) Material Evidence
fact did or did not occur, and negative
c) Relevant Evidence
when the witness states he did not see or
d) Competent Evidence
know of the occurrence of a fact ( People
e) Direct and circumstantial evidence
vs. Ramos, L-30420, Sept. 22, 1971 )
f) Primary or best or secondary evidence
h) Expert evidence – given by one possessing
g) Positive and negative evidence
in regard to a particular subject or
h) Export evidence
department of human activity knowledge
i) Cumulative evidence
does not usually acquired by other persons (
j) Corroborative evidence
U.S. vs. Gil, 13 Phil. 530 )
k) Rebutting evidence
i) Cumulative evidence – evidence of the
l) Prima facie evidence
same kind and character as that already
m) Conclusive evidence
given, and tends to prove the same
n) Real evidence
proposition ( Francisco, Ibid., citing Gardner
o) Testimonial evidence
vs. Gardner, 2 Gray ( Mass. 434 ), p. 5 )
j) Corroborative evidence – additional
a) Rule of Evidence – expresses the mode of
evidence of different kind and character,
manner of proving the facts and
tending to prove the same [point
circumstances upon which the party relies
( Francisco, supra, citing Wyne vs. Newman,
to establish the fact in dispute (Ruporto
75, Va., 811, 817, p. 4 )
Martin, Rules of Court in the Philippines. Vol.
k) Rebutting evidence – evidence given to
V. citing 20 Am. Jur. 34, p. 1 )
repel, counteract or disprove facts proved
b) Material evidence – tends to prove the fact
by the other side ( Nuevas, citing State vs.
in issue as that issue is determined by the
Silva, 21 Ida. 247, p. 531 )
rules of substantive law and pleadings
l) Prima facie evidence – evidence which
( Jaime R. Nuevas, Remedial Law Reviewer,
suffices for the proof of a fact in issue until
1971 Ed., citing Wigmore, Student’s Ed., p.
rebutted or overcome by other evidence
530 )
( Nuevas, citing Cal. Code of Civil
c) Relevant evidence – evidence is relevant
Procedure, Sec. 1833, p. 531 )
when it has a tendency in reason to
establish the probability or improbability if a
m) Conclusive evidence – evidence which is
fact in issue ( Vicente Francisco, The
incontrovertible ( Nuevas, citing Wood vs.
Revised Rules of Court in the Philippines,
Chapin, 13 NY 509, p. 531 )
1990 Ed., citing 1 Elliot on Evidence, p. 5 )
n) Real evidence – object ( real ) evidence is
d) Competent evidence – not excluded by law
that which is addressed to the senses of the
in a particular case ( Bautista vs. Aparece,
tribunal, as where objects are presented for
( CA ), 51 O.G. 805 )
the inspection of the court ( Franciso, citing
e) Direct and circumstantial evidence – direct
1 Jones on Evidence, 2nd ed., Sec. 16, p. 9 0
evidence proves the fact in dispute without
o) Testimonial evidence – testimony given to
the aid of any inference or presumption.,
the court of deposition by one who has
while circumstantial evidence is the proof
observed that to which he is testifying; or
of a fact or facts from which, taken either
one who, though who has not observed the
singly or collectively, the existence of the
facts, is nevertheless qualified to give an
particular fact in dispute may be inferred as
opinion relative to the fact ( Francisco,
 citing Gilbert, Law Summaries of Evidence,
p. 9 ) Q – WHEN IS EVIDENCE ADMISSIBLE?
A – Evidence is admissible when it is relevant to
Q – WHERE ARE OUR RULES OF EVIDENCE the issue and is not excluded by the law or
FOUND? these rules ( Sec. 3, Rule 128 )
A – Our entire rule s of evidence have been
incorporated in the Revised Rules of Court Q – WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES OF ADMISSIBILITY
OF EVIDENCE/
Q – DISTINGUISH EVIDENCE FROM PROOF A – In order that the evidence may be
A – Evidence is the means of proof: proof is the admissible, two requisites must concur, namely:
effect of evidence, the establishment of a. that is relevant to the issue; and
as fact by evidence. Proof results as a b. that is competent. That is, that it
probative effect of evidence and is the does not belong to the class of evidence which
conviction or persuasion of mind resulting is excluded by the law or Rules of Evidence
from a consideration of the evidence ( Vicente Francisco, The Revised Rules of Court
(Jaime R. Nuevas, Remedial Law in the Philippines, Vol. VII, 1990 Ed., p. 19 )
Reviewer, 1971 Ed., p. 531)
Q – WHEN IS EVIDENCE RELEVANT?
Q – WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF THE RULES OR LAW OF A – Evidence to be relevant must throw light
EVIDENCE/ upon, or have logical relation to the facts in
A – The law of evidence deals with the rules to issues to be established by one party or
be followed in presenting a matter of fact disproved by the other ( Ruperto G. Martin,
to a court for its use in the judicial Rules of Court in the Philippines, Vol. V., 1987
investigation. (1) it prescribes the manner ed., citing 20 Am. Jur. 240, p. 9 )
of presenting the evidence personally by
one who knows the thing, the subject to Q – WHEN IS EVIDENCE COMPETENT?
cross-examination, or by means of a A – Evidence is competent when it is not
preposition (2) it fixes the qualification and excluded by any of the rules of evidence
the privileges of witnesses, and the mode such as when it is hearsay or because it is
of examining them (3) and chiefly, it not best evidence which is within the
determines, as among probative matter, power of a party to produce. Evidence
what classes of things shall not be must not only be logically relevant, but
received ( Ruperto Martin, Rules of must be of such character as to be
Courts in the Philippines, Vol. V, 1978 Ed., receivable in courts of justice ( Ruperto G.
pp. 1-2 ) Martin, Ibid., citing Gilbert Law Summaries
on Evidence, p. 3 )
Q – WHAT IS THE OBJECT OF THE LAW OF
EVIDENCE?
A – The object of the law of evidence is to have Q- IS EVIDENCE ILLEGALLY OBTAINED
a specific inquiry of the truth to establish ADMISSIBLE? WHY?
the truth by the use of the perceptive and A – Evidence illegally obtains is inadmissible, the
reasoning faculties ( Martin, supra., p. 2 ) reason being that exclusion of such kind of
evidence is the only practical way of
Q – DISTINGUISH FACTUM PROBANDUM FROM enforcing the constitutional right against
FACTUM PROBANS unreasonable search and seizure
A – Factum probandum is the ultimate fact or ( Stonehill vs. Diokno, L-19550, June 19,
the fact to be established; factum 1967 )
probans is the evidentiary fact, or the fact
by which the factum probandum is to be Q – WHAT ARE THE TWO AXIOMS OF
established ( Nuevas, citing Wigmore 5-9, ADMISSIBILITY WHICH UNDERLIE THE ENTIRE
p. 531-532 ) STRUCTURE OF THE LAW OF EVIDENCE?
A – The following:
Q – ARE THE RULES OF EVIDENCE THE SAME, IN a. none but facts having rational
CRIMINAL AS WELL AS IN CIVIL CASES? probative value are admissible, which is the
A – Yes, the rules of evidence shall be the same axiom on relevancy; and
in all courts and in all trials and hearings b. all facts having rational probative
except as otherwise provided by law or value are admissible, unless some specific rule
these rules ( Sec. 2, Rule 128 )
forbids, which is the axiom on competency that is possibly prejudicial and of which he
( Nuevas, citing 1 Wigmore 289-95, p. 532 ) has no means of anticipating ( Martin, p. 15
citing 2 Jones on Evidence, 2 nd Ed., 1086,
Q – WHAT ARE THE THREE KINDS OR CLASSES OF 1087 )
ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE?
A – They are: Q- WHAT ARE COLLATERAL MATTERS?
a. multiple admissibility; A – Collateral matters are those other than the
b. conditional admissibility; facts in issue and which are offered as a
c. curative admissibility basis for inference as to existence of the
facts in issue ( Sec. 4, Rule 129 )
Q – WHAT IS MEANT BY MULTIPLE ADMISSIBILITY
OF EVIDENCE? Q – WHEN MAY THE COURT ALLOW EVIDENCE ON
A – This means evidence which is [plainly COLLATERAL MATTERS?
relevant and competent for two or more A – Evidence on collateral matters shall not be
purposes. When this happens, such allowed, except when it tends in any
evidence will be received if it satisfies all the reasonable degree to establish the probability
requirements prescribed by law in order that or improbability of the fact in issue ( Sec. 4, Rule
it may be admissible for the purpose for 128 )
which it is presented, even if it does not
satisfy the other requisites for its admissibility
for other purposes ( People vs. Yatco. 97 Q – GIVE THE CONCEPT OF (1) PROSPECTANT
Phil. 940 ) COLLATERAL MATTERS; (2) CONCOMITANT
COLLATERAL MATTERS; (3) RETROSPECTANT
Q – WHAT IS MEANT BY CONDITIONAL COLLATERAL MATTERS
ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE? A – (1) Prospectant collateral matters are those
A – It means that the evidence which appear to preceding of the fact in issue but pointing
be material is admitted by the court subject forward to it, like moral character, motive;
to the condition that its connection to other conspiracy, etc.
facts subsequently to be proved will be (2) Concomitant collateral matters are
established( People vs. Yatco. Supra ) matters are those accompanying the fact
in issue and pointing to it, like alibi, or
Q – WHAT IS MEANT BY CURATIVE ADMISSIBILITY opportunity and incompatibility;
OF EVIDENCE? (3) Retrospectant collateral matters are
A – This means that evidence, otherwise those succeeding the fact in issue but
improper is admitted to contradict improper pointing forward to it, like flight and
evidence introduce by the other party concealment, behavior of the accused
( Jaime R. Nuevas, Remedial Law reviewer, upon being arrested; finger prints or foot
1971 ed., A & J Publishing citing Wigmore prints; articles left at the scene of the
304-09, p. 533 ) crime which may identify the culprit
( Judge Ed Vincent S. Albano, Remedial
Q - STATE THE RULE OF RELEVANCY OF EVIDENCE Law Reviewer 1st Ed. 1995, Rex Book Store,
A - Evidence must have such a relation to the p. 888 citing 1 Wigmore 442-43 )
fact in issue as to induce belief in its
existence or non-existence. Evidence on Q – WHAT IS THE BASIS OF THE RULES OF
collateral matter shall not be allowed, EVIDENCE?
except when it tends in any reasonable A – The basis upon which all rules of evidence
degree to establish the probability or must rest, if they are to rest upon reason, is
improbability of the fact of issue ( Sec. 4, their adaptation to the successful
Rule 128 ) development of the truth; and the rule of
evidence at one time though necessary
Q – WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE RULE ON to the ascertainment of truth should yield
RELEVANCY? to the experience has clearly demonstrate
A - The purpose of the rule on relevancy is to the fallacy or unwisdom of the old rule
restrict the field of inquiry to its proper scope ( Nuevas Remedial Law Reviewer, 1971
and to prevent the issues of becoming Ed., A & J Publishing, p. 534 citing Funk vs.
beclouded. It also aims to prevent surprise U.S., 290 U.S. 391 )
on the litigant, or the subjection to the party
to the necessity of meeting the evidence RULE 129
WHAT NEED TO BE PROVED b. the matter must be well and
authoritatively settled and not doubtful or
uncertain; and
Q – DEFINE JUDICIAL NOTICE
c. the matter must be known to be
A – Judicial notice is the cognizance of certain
within the limits of jurisdiction of the court
facts which judges may properly take and
( Martin, Ibid. p. 35 citing 1 Jones on Evidence,
act on without proof because they
2nd ed., 643; 20 Am. Jur. 48 )
already know them. It means no more
than that the court will bring to its aid and
Q – WHEN IS JUDICIAL NOTICE DISCRETIONARY?
consider, without proof of the facts, its
A – A court may take judicial notice of matters
knowledge of those matter of public
which are of public knowledge, or are
concern which are known by all well-
capable of unquestionable demonstration,
informed persons ( Martin, Revised Rules
or ought to be known to judges because of
of Evidence, 1985 Ed., Premium Book
their judicial functions ( Sec. 2, Rule 129 )
Store, p. 3 citing C.J.S. 509 )

Q – WHEN IS HEARING NECESSARY IN JUDICIAL

Q – WHAT IS THE FUNCTION OF JUDICIAL
NOTICE?
NOTICE?
A – During the trial, the court, on its own
A – It displaces evidence since, as it stands for
initiative, or on request of the party, may
proof, it fulfills the object which evidence is
announce its intention to take judicial notice
designed to fulfill and make evidence
of any matter and allow the parties to be
unnecessary ( Nuevas, Ibid., p. 535
heard thereon
citing State vs. Main, 69 Conn 123 )

After the trial, and before judgment

Q – STATE THE PRINCIPLE ON WHICH JUDICIAL
or on appeal, the proper court. On its own
NOTICE IS BASED?
initiative or request of a party, may take
A – The doctrine of judicial notice is based upon
judicial notice of any matter and allow the
obvious reasons of convenience and
parties to be heard thereon if such matter is
expediency and operated to have
decisive of a material issue in the case ( Sec.
trouble, expense and time which would
3, Rule 129 )
be lost in establishing, in the ordinary way,
facts which do not admit of contradiction
Q – IS THERE ANY NEED TO PROVE ADMISSIONS
( Nuevas, Ibid., p. 535 citing 20 Am., Jur.
IN THE COURT OF PROCEEDING IN COURT?
47; Tracy’s Handbook, 62 ed., p. 44 )
A – An admission, verbal or written, made by a
party in the course of the proceedings in the
Q- WHEN IS JUDICIAL NOTICE MANDATORY?
same case, does not require proof ( Sec. 4,
A – A court shall take judicial notice without the
Rule 129 )
introduction of evidence, of the existence
and territorial extent of states, their
Q – HOW MAY AN ADMISSION BE
political history, forms of government and
CONTRADICTED?
symbols of nationality, the law of nations,
A – Through admission may be contradicted
the admiralty and maritime courts of the
only by showing that it was made through
world and their seals, the political
palpable mistake or that no such admission
constitution and history of the Philippines,
was made ( Sec. 4, Rule 129 )
the official acts of legislative, executive
and judicial departments of the
RULE 130
Philippines, the laws of nature, the
measure of time and the geographical RULES ON ADMISSIBILITY
divisions ( Sec. 1, Rule 129, Revised Rules
on Evidence ) Q – WHAT ARE THE OBJECTS AS EVIDENCE?
A – Objects as evidenced are those addressed
Q- WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES OF JUDICIAL to the senses of the court. When an object
NOTICE? is relevant to the fact in issue, it mat be
A – Generally speaking, matters of judicial exhibited to, examined or viewed by the
notice have three material requisites, namely: court ( Sec. 1, Rule 130 )
a. the matter be common and
general knowledge; Q – WHAT IS THE PRO BATIVE VALUE OF OBJECT
AS EVIDENCE?
A – Proof which is addressed directly to the b. when the original is in the custody
senses of the court is a most convincing or under the control of the party against whom
and satisfactory class of proof ( Martin, p. the evidence is offered, and the latter fails to
57 citing 20 Am. Jur. ) object evidence is produce it after reasonable notice;
usually the most trustworthy type of c. when the original consists of
evidence ( Martin, citing Gilbert Law numerous accounts or other documents which
Summaries on Evidence, p. 1 ) cannot be examined in court without great loss
of time and fact sought to be established from
Q – WHAT ARE THE LIMITATIONS TO THE them is only the general result of the whole; and
ADMISSIBILITY OF OBJECT EVIDENCE? d. when the original is a public
A – The following : record in the custody of a public officer or is
a. the evidence must e relevant; recorded in a public office ( Sec. 3, Rule 130 )
( Sec. 1, Rule 130 )
b. indecent or improper objects Q – WHAT ARE CONSIDERED ORIGINALS OF A
should be excluded, unless the same is DOCUMENT?
necessary for ascertaining the truth; ( Brown vs. A – The following:
Swineford, 28 Am. Rep. 582 ) a. the original of a document is one
c. repulsive objects should also be of the contents of which are the subject of
excluded if not absolutely necessary for the inquiry
administration of justice ( Knowless vs. b. when a document is in two or
Crampton, 55 Conn. 366 ) more copies executed at or about the same
time, with identical contents, all such copies are
Q – WHAT IS THE SCOPE OB OBJECT OF equally regarded as originals
EVIDENCE? c. when an entry is repeated in a
A – It is the best and the highest form of proof regular course of business, one being copied
( Gentry vs. Mominiss, 3 Dana, Ky. 382 ) from another at or near the time of transaction,
all the entries are likewise equally regarded as
Q – WHAT IS THE PRE-REQUISITE FOR THE originals ( Sec. 4, Rule 130 )
ADMISSION OF THE OBJECT EVIDENCE?
A – The object must be first identified, which SECONDARY EVIDENCE
means that it must be shown, by
independent evidence, that the object Q – HOW MAY THE ORIGINAL OF A LOST OR
offered is the thing in dispute ( People vs. DESTROYED DOCUMENT BE PROVED?
Besold, 154 Cal. 363) A – When the original document has been lost
or destroyed, or cannot be produced in
B. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE court, the offeror, upon proof of its
execution or existence and the cause of its
Q – WHAT ARE DOCUMENTS AS EVIDENCE? unavailability without bad faith on its part,
A – Documents as evidence consists of writings may prove its contents by a copy or by a
or any material containing letters, words, recital of its contents in some authentic
numbers, figures, symbols or other modes documents, or by the testimony of witness in
of written expressions offered as proof of the order stated ( Sec. 5, Rule 130 )
their contents ( Sec. 2, Rule 130 )
Q – WHEN MAY SECONDARY EVIDENCE BE
SHOWN IF THE ORIGINAL OF A DOCUMENT IS IN
Q – STATE THE BEST EVIDENCE RULE THE POCESSION OF THE ADVERSE PARTY?
A – When the subject of inquiry is the contents A – If the document is in the custody or under
of a document, no evidence shall be the control of the adverse party he must
admissible other than the original have a reasonable notice to produce it. If
document itself ( Sec. 3, Rule 130 ) after such notice and after satisfactory
proof of its existence, he fails to produce
Q – THE RULE IS THAT, NO EVIDENCE SHALL BE that document secondary evidence may
ADMISSIBLE OTHER THEN THE DOCUMENTS ITSELF, be presented as in the case of its lost ( Sec.
ARE THERE EXCEPTION? 6, Rule 130 )
A – Yes, in the following cases:
a. when the original has been lost or Q – HOW MAY A PUBLIC DOCUMENT BE PROVED?
destroy, or cannot be produced in court, A – When the original of a document is in the
without bad faith on the part of the offeror; custody of a public officer and is recorded
 in a public office, its contents may be The term “ agreement “ includes wills
proved by a certified copy issued by the ( Sec. 9, Rule 130 )
public office in custody thereof ( Sec. 7, Rule
130 ) INTERPRETATION OF DOCUMENTS

Q – IS THE PARTY WHO CALLS FOR THE Q- HOW SHALL THE LANGUAGE OF A WRITING BE
PRODUCTION OF A DOCUMENT BOUND TO OFFER INTERPRETED?
IT IN EVIDENCE? A – The language of a writing is to be
A – No. A party who calls for the production of a interpreted according to the legal meaning, it
document and inspects the same is not bears in the place of execution, unless the
obliged to offer it as evidence parties intended otherwise ( Sec. 10, Rule 130 )

PAROL EVIDENCE RULE Q- GIVE SOME RULES IN THE INTERPRETATION OF

DOCUMENTS
Q – WHAT IS PAROL EVIDENCE? A – They are:
A – Parol evidence literally means oral or verbal a. in the construction of an
testimony of a witness ( Ballentine’s instrument where there are several provision of
Law Dict.., 2 nd
Ed., p. 932 ) However, in the particulars, such a construction is, if possible, to
application of the rule, it has been be adopted as will give effect to all ( Sec. 11,
extended to writings other than the Rule 130 )
complete written agreement of the parties ( b. in the construction of an
Phil. Sugar Estates Dev. Co. vs. Gov’t of P.I. instrument, the intention of the parties is to be
247 U.S. 385; Woodhous vs. Halili, 93 Phil. pursued and when a general and a particular
526 ) Another term for parol evidence is provision are inconsistent, the latter is
intrinsic evidence or evidence aliunde ( Uy paramount to the former. So a particular intent
Coque vs. Sioca, 43 Phil. 405 ) will control a general one that is inconsistent
with it ( Sec.12, Rule 130 )
c. for the proper construction of an
Q – STATE THE RULE WHEN THE TERMS OF instrument, the circumstances under which it
AGREEMENT ARE PUT TO WRITING was made, including the situation of the subject
A – When the terms of an agreement have thereof and of the parties to it, may be shown,
been reduced to writing, it is considered so that the judge may be place in the position
as containing all the terms agreed upon of those whose language he is to interpret ( Sec.
and there can be, between the parties 13, Rule 130 )
and their successors in interest, no d. the terms of writing are presumed
evidence of such terms other than the to have been used in their primary and general
contents of the written agreement ( Sec. acceptation, but evidence is admissible to
9, Rule 130 ) show that they have local, technical, or
otherwise peculiar signification, and were so
Q – UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES MAY A used and understood in the particular instance,
PARTY PRESENT EVIDENCE TO MODIFY, EXPLAIN in which case the agreement must be
OR ADD TO THE TERMS OF THE WRITTEN constructed accordingly ( Sec. 14, Rule 130 )
EVIDENCE? e. when an instrument consists partly
A – A party may present evidence to modify, of written words and partly of a printed form,
explain or add to the terms of the written and the two are inconsistent, the former
agreement if he puts in issue in his controls the latter ( Sec. 15, Rule 130 )
pleading; f. when the character in which the
a. an intrinsic ambiguity mistake, or instruments are difficult to be deciphered, or the
imperfection in the written agreement; language is not understood by the court, the
b. the failure of the written evidence of persons skilled in deciphering the
agreement to express the true intent and character, or who understand the language is
agreement of the parties thereto; admissible to declare the characters or the
c. the validity of written agreement; meaning of the language ( Sec. 16, Rule 130 )
d. the existence of other terms g. when the terms of an agreement
agreed to by the parties or their successors in have been intended in a different sense by the
interest after the execution of the written different parties to it, that sense is to prevail
agreement against either party in which he supposed the
other understood it, and when different
constructions of a provision are otherwise Q – IS A DEAF AND DUMB PERSON COMPETENT
equally proper, that is to be taken which the TO TESTIFY?
most favorable to the party in whose favor the A – A deaf and dumb person may testify in any
provision was made ( Sec. 17, Rule 130 ) manner satisfactory to the court, as by
h. when an instrument is equally writing or signs through an interpreter.
susceptible of two interpretations, one in favor ( People vs. De Leon 50 Phil. 539 ) If he
of natural right and the other against it, the testifies by signs, there must be an
former is to be adopted ( Sec. 18, Rule 130 ) interpreter with whom he may have an
i. an instrument may be construed understanding by such means ( Territory
according to usage, in order to determine its vs. Duran 3 N.M. 189 ) Otherwise he
true character ( Sec. 19, Rule 130 ) cannot testify ( People vs. Bustos, 51 Phil.
385 )

C. TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE Q – IS THE INTOXICATED PERSON COMPETENT TO

TESTIFY/
1. Qualification of Witness A – Drunkenness does not pursue disqualify a
witness from testifying. The port of
Q - WHO ARE COMPETENT TO BE WITNESSES? Pennsylvania said on this matter: “ The point
A – All persons who can perceive, and of inquiry is the moment of examination. Is
perceiving can make known their the witness then offered so besotted in his
perception to others, may be witnesses understanding as to be deprived of his
Neither religious or political belief, intelligence? If he is, excluded him; even if
interest in the outcome of the case, or he be a hard drinker or habitual drunkard
conviction of a crime unless otherwise yet, if at that time, he is sober, and
provided by law, shall not be a ground for possessed of a sound mind, he is to be
disqualification.(Sec. 20, Rule 130 ) perceived. “ ( Gebhar vs. Shindle, 15 Serg. &
R. ( Pa. ) 283 )
Q - WHO MAY NOT BE A WITNESS BY REASON OF
MENTAL INCAPACITY OR IMMATURITY? Q – IS A PERSON UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF
A – The following persons cannot be witnesses: OPIUM OR OTHER DRUGS, COMPETENT TO
a. those whose mental condition, at TESTIFY?
the time of there production for examination, is A – If the witness at the time of his examination,
such that they are incapable of intelligently is so intoxicated by opium or other drugs
making known their perception to others; and that he is deprived of his mental powers to
b. children whose mental maturity is such a degree as to be capable of making
such to render them incapable of perceiving known his perceptions, he is disqualified
the facts respecting which they are examined from testifying. Otherwise, he is competent
and of relating them truthfully ( sec. 21, rule
130 ) Q – HOW CAN THE COMPETENCY OF AN INFANT
BE DETERMINED?
Q – WHEN ARE INSANE PERSONS ICOMPETENT TO A – It is a doctrine laid down in modern
TESTIFY/ decisions that the test of an infant’s
A – What renders insane persons incompetent competency to testify is his capacity to
to testify is their insanity “ at the time of receive just impressions truly. If he possesses
their production “ Insanity at the time of the necessary mental capacity to that
the occurrence on which as witness is effect and comprehends the obligation of
called upon to testify merely affects his an oath, he is a competent witness ( Moran,
credibility, not his competency ( Moran, Ibid., p. 579 citing Wheeler vs. U.S. 523 )
Remedial Law Reviewer, p. 578 )
Q – WHO ARE DISQUALIFIED TO BE WITNESS BY
Q – WHAT DEGREE OF INSANITY DISQUALIFIES A REASON OF MARRIAGE?
PERSON FROM TESTIFYING? A – During their marriage, neither the husband
A – A person is incompetent to testify if he is nor the wife may testify for or against the
insane to such degree as to be incapable other without the consent of the affected
of perceiving and making known his spouse, except in a civil case by one
perception to others ( Moran, ibid., against the other or the latter’s direct
p. 578 citing State v. Meyers, 46 Nebr. 152 ) descendants or ascendants ( Sec. 22, Rule
130 )
 against the estate of such deceased person
Q – WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THE RULE or against such person of unsound mind,
FORBIDDING ONE SPOUSE TO TESTIFY FOR OR cannot testify as to any matter of fact
AGAINST THE OTHER? occurring before the death of such
A - The rule forbidding one spouse to testify or diseased person or before such person
against the other is based on principles became of unsound mind. (Sec. 23, Rule
which are deemed important to preserve 130)
the marriage relation as one of full
confidence and affection, and that this is Q – WHO MAY NOT BE A WITNESS AS TO MATTERS
regarded as more important in public LEARNED IN CONFIDENCE?
welfare than that the exigencies of the A – The following persons cannot testify as to
lawsuits should authorize domestic peace to matters learned in confidence in the following
be disregarded for the sake of ferreting out cases:
some fact within the knowledge of strangers a. the husband or the wife, during or
( U.S. vs. Concepcion, 31 Phil 182 ) after the marriage, cannot be examined
without the consent of the other as to any
Q – WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES OF THE RULE OF communication receive in confidence by one
FORBIDDING ONE SPOUSE TO TESTIFY FOR OR from the other during the marriage except in a
AGAINST THE OTHER? civil case by one against the other, or in the
A – There are three: criminal case for a crime committed by one
a. that the spouse for or against against the other or the latter’s direct
whom the testimony of the other is offered, is a descendants or ascendants;
party to the case; b. an attorney cannot, without the
b. that the spouse are legally consent of his client, be examined as to any
married; and communication made by the client to him, or
c. that the case is not by one against his advice given thereon in the course of, or
the other ( Moran, Remedial Law Reviewer, p. with a view to, professional employment, nor
584 ) can an attorney’s secretary, stenographer, or
clerk be examined, without the consent of the
Q – IN ONE CASE, THE DEFENDANT, WHO WAS client and his employer, concerning any fact
ACCUSEDOF KILLING HIS SON TESTIFIED IN HIS the knowledge of which has been acquiring in
OWN BEHALF DID NOT LIMIT HIMSELF TO such capacity;
DENYING THAT HE WAS A KILLER BUT WENT c. a person authorized to practice
FURTHER AND IMPUTED THE CRIME TO HIS WIFE. medicine, surgery or obstetrics cannot in a
MAY THE WIFE BE ALLOWED TO TESTIFY IN
REBUTTAL AGAINST THE HUSBAND’S CONSENT? Q- WHO MAY NOT BE A WITNESS AS TO MATTERS
A – Yes. In giving such testimony, the husband LEARNED IN CONFIDENCE?
must, in all fairness, be held to have A- The following persons cannot testify as to matters
intended all its natural and necessary learned in confidence in the following cases:
consequences. By his said act, the husband
– himself exercising the very right which he a. The husband of the wife, during or after the
would deny to his wife upon the ground of marriage, cannot be examined without the
their marital relations – must be taken to consent of the other as to any
have waived all objections to the latter’s communication received in confidence by
testimony upon rebuttal, even considering one from the other during the marriage
that such object would have been except in a civil case by one against the
available at the outset. (People vs. other, or in criminal case for a crime
Francisco, 78 Phil 694) committed by one against the other or the
latter’s direct descendants or ascendants;
Q - WHO ARE QUALIFIED TO BE WITNESS BY
REASON OF DEATH OR INSANITY OF ADVERSE b. An attorney cannot, without the consent of
PARTY? his client, be examined as to any
A – Parties or assignors of parties to a case, or communication made by client to him, or
persons in whose behalf a case is his advice given thereon in the course of, or
prosecuted, against an executor or with a view to, professional employment, nor
administrator or other representative of a can an attorney’s secretary, stenographer,
deceased person, or against a person of or clerk be examined, without the consent
unsound mind, upon a claim or demand of the client and his employer, concerning
 any fact the knowledge of which has been a) There must be a relation of attorney and
acquired in such capacity; client;
b) There must be a communication by the
c. A person authorized to practice medicine, client to the attorney, or advice thereon
surgery or obstetrics cannot in a civil case, given by the latter to the former;
without the consent of the patient, be c) The communication or advice must
examined as to any advice or treatment have been given confidentially;
given by him or any information which he d) The communication must have been
may have acquired in attending such made in the course of professional
patient in a professional capacity, which employment.
information was necessary to enable him to
act in that capacity, and which would Q – WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THIS PRIVILEGE?
blacken the reputation of the patient. A – The reason is to promote the confidence of the
people in attorneys for their work is essential to
d. A minister or priest cannot, without the the administration of justice and to
consent of the person making the encourage the freedom of consultation of
confession made to or any advice given by lawyers for clients. (Nuevas, Ibid., p. 561 citing
him in his professional character in the Fosters vs. Hall, 12 Pick 89; Alexander vs. U.S.,
course of discipline enjoined by the church 138 U.S. 353)
to which the minister or priest belongs;
Q –MAY THE LAWYER BE COMPELLED TO TESTIFY ON
e. A public officer cannot be examined during COMMUNICATIOS MADE TO HIM AS TO A
his term of office or afterwards, as to FUTURE CRIME OR WRONG? WHY?
communications made to him in official A – YES, because those communications are not
confidence, when the courts finds that the covered by the privilege for the reason that a
public interest would suffer by the disclosure. lawyer is not supposed to be consulted on a
(Sec., Rule 130) future crime or wrong. (Matthews vs.
Hoaglang, 21 Atl. 1054)

Q – GIVE THE REQUISITES OF THE RULE ON MARITAL Q – MAY A LAWYER BE COMPELLED TO TESTIFY ON
COMMUNICATIONS. COMMUNICATIONS MADE TO HIM AS TO A
A – The following: PAST CRIME OR WRONG? WHY?
a. The spouses are legally married; A – NO, for those communications are protect by
b. The communication, oral or written, is the privilege. (Alexander vs. U.S., 138 U.S. 353)
made during the marriage;.
c. The communication is confidential. Q – WHAT IS THE DURATION OF THIS PRIVILEGE?
(Nuevas, Ibid., p. 559) A - Its duration is forever. (Carter vs. West, 93 Ky.
211)
Q – WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THIS PRIVELEGE?
A – The reason is to preserve the peace of families
and maintain the sacred institution of Q – GIVE THE EXCEPTION TO THE APPLICATION OF
marriage. (Nuevas, Ibid., p. 559 citing Mever THIS PRIVILEGE AND REASON THEREFOR.
svs. State, 40 Fla. 216). A – This privilege does not apply to an action filed
by the lawyer against his client, and this
Q – MAY THE PRIVILEGE BE WAIVED AND IF SO, HOW AND BY exception is for the protection of the lawyer.
WHOM? (Hunt vs. Blackburn, 128 U.S. 464)
A – The privilege is claimable by the spouse not
called as a witness, so that it is waivable only Q – GIVE THE REQUISITES OF THE PRIVILEGE OF
by him or her; and it is waivable by any act of PHYSICIAN AND PATIENT.
such spouse which might be considered as an A – The following:
express or implied consent to the disclosure of a) That the privilege is claimed in a civil
the communication. (Neuvas, Ibid., citing case;
People vs. Hayes, 140 N.Y. 484). b) That the person against whom the
privilege is claimed, is one duly
Q – GIVE THE REQUISITES OF THE PRIVILEGE OF ATTORNEY authorized to practice medicine, surgery
AND CLIENT. or obstetrics;
A – The following: c) That such person acquired the
information while he was attending the
 patient in his professional capacity, Q – GIVE THE REQUISITES OF THE PRIVILEGE OF A
which information was necessary to PUBLIC OFFICER.
enable him to act in that capacity; and A – The following:
d) That the information was confidential, a) There must be a confidential official
and if disclosed, shall tend to blacken communication;
the character of the patient. b) The communication must have been
made to a public officer; and
Q – IS THE PRIVILEGE OF COMUNICATIONS BETWEEN c) The disclosure of the communication
PHYSICIAN AND PATIENT APPLICABLE IN would affect public interest.
CRIMINAL CASES?
A – In criminal cases, the privilege does not apply. Q – WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THEPRIVILEGE
A – The privilege is intended not for the protection
Q – WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THIS PRIVILEGE? of public officers, but for the protection of
A – The reason is to facilitate and make safe, full public interest. (Morn, Ibid., p. 599 citing
and confidential disclosure by patient to Vogel vs. Gruaz, 110 U.S. 311)
physician of all symptoms, untrammeled by
apprehension of their subsequent and Q – WHAT IS THE DURATION OF THE PRIVILEGE
enforced disclosure and publication on the A - The public officer is privileged not to testify to
witness stand. (Nuevas, Ibid., 562 citing Will of official secrets, not only during his term of
Bruendl, 102 Wis. 47) office, but also afterwards. The law, therefore,
intends that secrecy be permanent. (Moran,
Q – WHEN IS THERE PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYMENT OF Ibid., p. 509)
A PHYSICIAN?
A – There is such employment of a physician when 2. Testimonial Privilege
he is called for the purpose of treatment,
whether curative, preventive or palliative. Q – IS A DESCENDANT DISQUALIFIED TO TESTIFY, IN A
(Smart vs. Kansas City, 208 Mo. 162) There is CRIMINAL CASE, AGAINST HIS PARENTS OR HIS
no professional employment when a ASCENDANTS?
physician is consulted for an unlawful purpose, A - A descendant is not disqualified to testify
like the procuring of an abortion. (Nuevas, against his parents and descendants. The
Ibd., p. 563 citing Seifert vs. State, 67 N.E. 100) rules provides that “No person may be
compelled to testify against his parents, other
Q – WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF THIS PRIVILEGE? direct ascendants, children or other direct
A - The privilege applies not only to the testimony of descendants.” (Sec. 25, Rule 130)
the physician on the stand, but also to
affidavits, certificates, prescription, and 3. Admission and Confessions
hospital records. (Krap vs. Metropolitan Life
Ins. Co., 143 Mich. 309) Q – WHAT IS AN ADMISSION?
A - The act, declaration or omission of a party as to
a relevant fact may be given in evidence
Q – GIVE THE REQUISITES OF THE PRIVILEGE OF PRIEST against him. (Sec. 26, Rule 130)
AND PENITENT.
A – The following: Q – AGAINST WHOM ARE ADMISSION RECEIVABLE?
a) There must be a priest and a penitent; A – Admissions are receivable against the party
b) There must be a confession; who made them, but not in his favor, because
c) The confession must have been given to then they would be self-serving evidence (5
the priest in his professional capacity; Moran, Comments, p. 212, 1963 Ed.)
and
d) The confession must have been made in Q – DEFINE SELF-SERVING EVIDENCE AND STATE IF IT
the course of discipline enjoined by the IS ADMISSIBLE. WHY?
church to which the penitent belongs. A – Self-serving evidence is an admission favorable
to the party making it. (Lichauco vs. Atlantic
Q – WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THE PRIVILEGE? Gulf, etc., 84 Phil. 330). It is not admissible in
A – The reason is to preserve the sanctity of the evidence because of its hearsay character,
confessional institution. (People’s vs. Philipps, and for the further reason that a man may be
1 West L.J. 109) safely believed if he declares against his own
interest, but not if he advocates his interest.
(Lichauco vs. Atlantic Gulf, etc., supra).
 commenced. (Art. 2028, Civil Code of the
Q – CLASSIFY ADMISSIONS Philippines)
A – Admissions are generally divided into two
classes: Q – WHAT CONSTITUTE AN OFFER OF COMPROMISE?
1. Judicial or those made on the record, or in A – It is often difficult to determine in a particular
connection with the judicial proceeding in case what amounts to an ordinary admission
which it is offered; and what constitutes an offer of compromise.
2. Extra-judicial, or those made elsewhere, The intention of the parties must be the guide
irrespective of time, place, or to whom in each case. If the proposal is tentative, and
made. (Martin, Revised Rules on any statement made in connection with it is
Evidence, p. 209 citing The Chamberlayne hypothetical – if the offer was made to “buy
Trial Evidence, p. 42) peace” and in contemplation of mutual
concessions, it is as to such point a mere offer
Q – DISTINGUISH ADMISSION FROM A CONFESSION. of compromise. On the other hand, if the
A - Admission operates equally in both civil and intention is apparently a liability recognized as
criminal cases and with the same effect, while such, the proposal is an ordinary admission.
confession is an admission by the person (Martin, Revised Rules on Evidence, 1985 Ed.,
accused of having committed the act of p. 220 citing 31- A C.J.S. 728-729)
which he is accused. “It pertakes largely of
the nature of an offer to compromise with the Q – STATE THE RULE OF RES INTER ALIOS ACTA AND
criminal authorities. (Martin, Ibid., p 210 citing THE EXCEPTIONS.
The Chamberlayen Trial Evidence, p. 441). A – The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by
an act, declaration, or omission of another
Q – STATE THE RULE ON OFFER OF COMPROMISE. (Sec. 28, Rule 130) Except when between the
A - In civil cases, an offer of compromise is not an party making the admission and the party
admission of any liability, and is not admissible against whom the admission is offered, the
in evidence against the offeror. relation of (a) partnership, (b) agency, (c)
In criminal cases, except those involving joint interest, (d) conspiracy or (e) privity exists.
quasi-offenses (criminal negligence) or those (Secs. 29 to 33, Rule 130).
allowed by law to be compromised, an offer
of compromise by the accused may be Q – GIVE THE REASON FOR THE RULE OF RES INTER
received in evidence as an implied admission ALIOS ACTA
of guilt. A – On the principle good faith and mutual
A plea of guilty later withdrawn, or an convenience, a man’s acts, conduct and
unaccepted offer of a lea of guilty to a lesser declarations are binding upon him and,
offense, is not admissible in evidence against therefore, evidence, against him. Yet, it does
the accused who made the plea or offer. not only seem inconvenient, but also
(Sec. 27, Rule 130). manifestly, unjust, that a man should be
bound by the acts of strangers, neither can
Q – GIVE THE EFFECTS OF AN OFFER TO their acts or conduct be used as evidence
COMPROMISE. against him. (Nuevas, Ibid, p. 568 citing Stack
A- It depends on whether the offer is made in on Evidence, 35d., pp. 58-59)
a civil or criminal case.
It made in a civil case, it is not an Q – WHEN MAY THE ACT OR DECLARATION OF CO-
admission that anything is due and, therefore, PARTNER OR AGENT BE ADMISSIBLE AS
not admissible in evidence. (Obejera vs. Iga EVIDENCE AGAINST HIS PRINCIPAL?
Sy, 76 Phil. 580) A - The act or declaration of a partner or agent of
If made in a criminal case, it is an the party within the scoop of his authority and
implied admission of guilt and, therefore, during the existence of the partnership or
admissible in evidence, unless those involving agency, may be given in evidence of the
quasi-offense(criminal negligence) or those partnership or agency, against such party
allowed by laws to be compromised. (Sec. after the partnership or agency is shown by
27, Rule 130). evidence other than such act or declaration.
The same rule applies to the act or
Q – DEFINE COMPROMISE declaration of a joint owner, joint debtor, or
A – A compromise is a contract whereby the other person jointly interested with the party.
parties, by making reciprocal concessions, (Sec. 29, Rule 130).
avoid a litigation or put an end tone already
Q – WHEN MAY AN ADMISSION OF A PARTNER BE A – The word “privies” denotes not only the idea of
RECEIVED IN EVIDENCE AGAINST HIS CO- succession in right of heirship or testamentary
PARTNER? legacy, but also succession by virtue of acts
A – When the following requisites occur: intervivos, as by assignment, subrogation, or
a) The partnership must be established by purchase – in fact any act whereby the
independent evidence; successor is substituted in the place of the
b) The statement refers to a matter within predecessor in interest. (Alpuerto vs. Pastor &
the scope of the partnership; and Roa, 38 Phil. 785).
c) The statement was made during the
existence of the partnership. (Sec. 29, Q – GIVE THE RULE ON ADMISSION BY SILENCE, THE
Rule 130). REASON THEREFORE, AND THE EXCEPTION, IS
ANY.
Q – WHEN MAY THE ADMISSION OF AN AGENT BE A – An act or declaration made in the presence
RECEIVED IN EVIDENCE AGAINST HIS and within the hearing or observation of a
PRINCIPAL? party who does or say nothing when the act
A - When the following requisites concur: or declaration is such as naturally to call for
a) The agency must be established by action or comment if not true, and when
independent evidence; proper and possible for him to do so, may be
b) The statement refers to a matter within given in evidence against him. (Sec. 32, Rule
the scope of the agency; and 130). This rule applies to both civil and
c) The statement was made during the criminal cases. The reason is the recognized
existence of the agency. (Nuevas, Ibid., rule that if a man remains silent when he
p. 569 citing Hitchman Coal etc. vs. ought to speak, he will be debarred from
Mithcell, 245 U.S. 229) speaking later. Qui tacet consentire videtur or
silent means consent. (Gabriel vs. Baens, 56
Q – STATE THE RULE ON ADMISSION BY Phil. 314)
CONSPIRACTOR?
A – The act or declaration of a conspiractor relating The exceptions to this rule are the following:
to the conspiracy and during its existence,
may be given in evidence against the co- a) Where no good reason exists for the party
conspirator after the conspiracy is shown by to comment on the act or declaration as
evidence other than such act or declaration. when the act or declaration was not
(Sec. 30, Rule 130). specifically directed to the party who
remained silent (80 A.L.R., Anno., 1272)
Q – WHEN IS THE ADMISSION OF A CONSPIRACTOR b) When the party had no opportunity to
RECEIVABLE IN EVIDENCE AGAINST HIS CO- comment on the act or declaration;
CONSPIRACTOR? (People vs. Ranario, 49 Phil. 220)
A - When the following requisites concur: c) Where the act or declaration was made in
a) The conspiracy must be established by the course of an official investigation; (U.S.
independent evidence; vs Dela Cruz 12 Phil. 87)
b) The statement refers to the purpose or
object of the conspiracy: and Q – WHAT IS THE BASIS OF THE RULE ON ADMISSION
c) The statement was made during the BY SILENCE?
existence of the conspiracy. (Sec. 30, Rule A – The basis of such rule is that the natural reaction
130); People vs. Dacanay, 92 Phil. 873) of one accused of the commission of a crime
or of the implication therein is to deny the
This rule refers to extrajudicial acts and declarations accusation if it is unjust or unfounded. (Martin,
of a conspiractor, and not to his testimony as a Revised Rules on Evidence, p. 252 citing
witness at the trial. (People vs. Dacanay, supra). Mathews vs. State, 55 Ala, 187, 28 Ann. Rep.
698)
Q – GIVE THE RULE ON ADMISSION BY PRIVIES.
A – Where one derives title to property from Q – DEFINE CONFESSION
another, the act, declaration, or omission of A – The declaration of an accused acknowledging
the latter, while holding the title, in relation to his guilt of the offense charged or of any
the property, is evidence against the former. offence necessarily included therein, may be
(Sec. 31, rule 130). given in evidence against him. (Sec. 33, Rule
130).
Q – DEFINE PRIVIES.
Q – DISTINGUISH CONFESSION FROM ADMISSION same maltreatment. (U.S. vs. Baluyot, 1 Phil.
A – A confession as distinguished from an admission 451)
is a declaration made at any time by a
person voluntarily, without compulsion or Q – WHEN IS THREAT SUFFICIENT TORENDER A
inducement, stating or acknowledging that CONFESSION INVOLUNTARY?
he has committed or participated in the A – It must be a threat of bodily harm or injury and
commission of a crime. The term admission on accompanied by overt acts showing
the other hand is usually applied in criminal determination to carry out the threat. (People
cases to statements of fact by the accused vs. Cabrera, 82 Phil 839).
which do not directly involve an
acknowledgement of the guilt of the accused Q – WHEN IS A PROMISE OF REWARD OR LENIENCY
or of criminal intent to commit the offense SUFFICIENT TO RENDER A CONFESSION
with which he is charged. (U.S. vs. Corraled, INVOLUNTARY?
28 Phil. 362; U.S. vs. Razon & Tayag, 37 Phil. A – It must be a promise of immunity from or
856) leniency in the criminal prosecution and made
by a person who is in a position to grant the
Q – CLASSIFY CONFESSIONA AND DEFINE EACH same. (People vs. Hernandez, 91 Phil. 334)
A – A confession may be judicial or extra-judicial. A
judicial confessions is that made in the trial Q – AGAINST WHOM IS A CONFESSION ADMISSIBLE?
court in the due course of legal proceedings, WHY? GIVE THE EXCEPTIONS, IF ANY.
whereas an extra-judicial confession is that A – A confession is admissible only against the
made elsewhere, either in a prior trial, in the accused who made it and not against his co-
preliminary investigation, or out of court to accused, for, as against the latter, the
any person. (Nuevas, Ibid., p. 571 citing confession would be hearsay and res inter alios
Underhill on Criminal Evidence, p. 241). acta (People vs. Talledo, 85 Phil. 533)

Q – WHEN IS A CONFESSION ADMISSIBLE? The exceptions to this rule are the following:
A – A confession is admissible when it is voluntary.
(People vs. Pulido, 85 Phil. 695) a) When the confession of an accused
implicating his co-accused is made judicially
Q – WHEN MAY A CONFESSION BE REJECTED? WHY? at a joint trial; (U.S. vs. Macamay, 36 Phil
A – A confession may be rejected when the 893)
following requisites concur: b) When the offer in evidence of an extra
judicial confession against a co-accused is
a) The confession is involuntary; and not objected to; (People vs. Atienza, 83 Phil
b) The confession is false (People vs. 576)
Villanueva, 98 Phi. 327; People vs. De Los c) When the co-accused against whom an
Santos, 93 Phil. 83) extra-judicial confession is offered had, by
The reason for the rule is that what his acts, conduct and declarations,
the law abhors is compelling an accused, adopted the confession as his own; (People
by means of force, violence, or intimidation, vs. Atienza, supra)
to tell a falsehood, and not compelling him d) Where several accused, without collusion,
by the same means to tell the truth. (People made extra judicial confessions which are
vs. Prias, L-13767, July 30, 1960) So that, identical in essential details and
even if a confession is involuntary, if it is corroborated by other evidence, each
proved or turns out to be true, the same is confession is admissible against the others;
admissible. (Ibid). (People vs. Go, 88 Phil. 203)
e) The confession of a conspirator is admissible
Q – IN ORDER TO RENDER A CONFESSION against his co-conspirators provided it was
INVOLUNTARY ON THE GROUND OF FORCE made during the existence of the
AND VIOLENCE , IS IT REQUIRED THAT IT BE conspiracy; (People vs. Ramirez, L-5875),
DIRECTLY EMPLOYED UPON THE PERSON OF THE May 15, 1953)
ACCUSED? WHY? f) When the recitals in the extra judicial
A – No, because it is enough that the force or confession of an accused is corroborated in
violence were employed upon the person of his its important details by other proofs in the
co-accused, in his presence and within his record, it may be admitted against the
observation, such that he had reasonable other accused. (People vs. Villanueva,
grounds to believe that he would suffer the L12687, July 31, 1962)
 A – An offer in writing to pay a particular sum of
Q – WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF AN EXTRA JUDICIAL money to deliver a written instrument or specific
CONFESSION OF A THIRD PERSON TENDING TO personal property is, if rejected without valid
EXCULPATE AN ACUSED? cause, equivalent to the actual production and
A – Unless such confession can be considered as tender of the money, instrument, or property.
part of the res gestae, it cannot be received (Sec. 35, Rule 130)
in favor of the accused for the reason that the
same is hearsay. (People vs. Catalino, L- 5. Testimony Knowledge
25403, March 15, 1968) Besides, the court
before which said extra-judicial confession is Q – IN GENERAL, TO WHAT FACTS MAY A WITNESS
offered has ample power to determine its TESTIFY?
credibility, and the court may discard the A – A witness can testify only to those facts which
same if it finds the confession in inherently he knows of his personal knowledge; that is,
improbable. (Ibid) which are derived from his own perception,
exception as otherwise provided in these rules.
(Sec. 36, Rule 130)
Q – WHAT IS THE PROBATIVE VALUE OF A
CONFESSION? Q – WHAT IS A HEARSAY EVIDENCE?
A – It depends on whether the confession is judicial A – Hearsay evidence is that which derives its value,
or extrajudicial. not solely from the credit to be given to the
witness upon the stand, but in part from the
A judicial confession, like a plea of guilty, veracity and competency of some other
is in law and in fact evidence of guilt of the person. (Clement vs. Packer, 125 U.S. 309) It is
most trustworthy kind, is conclusive upon the not limited to oral testimony; it also includes
court and is sufficient to sustain a judgment of writings. (Nuevas, Ibid., p. 576 citing 20 Am. Jur.
conviction. (People vs. Lastimoso, 83 Phil. 714) 400)?
A extrajudicial confession is not sufficient
for conviction unless corroborated by evidence Q – IS HEARSAY EVIDENCE ADMISSIBLE? WHY?
of corpus delicti. (People vs. Mananla, L – A – Hearsay evidence is not admissible because it
13142, Jan. 30, 1959) knows of his own knowledge a witness can
testify only on facts which he knows of his own
4. Previous Conduct as Evidence knowledge (Sec. 36, rule 130); and, furthermore,
to preserve the right of parties ot cross-examine
Q – STATE THE RULE ON SIMILAR ACTS AS EVIDENCE the original witness or person claiming to have
A – Evidence that one did or did not do a certain knowledge of the transaction or occurrence.
thing at one time is not admissible to prove that (People vs. Pagkaliwagan, 76 Phil. 457) The right
he did or did not do the same or a similar thing to cross-examine the adverse party’s witnesses is
at another time; but it may be received to essential in the administration of justice for it is
prove a specific intent or knowledge, identity, the only means of testing the credibility of
plan, system, scheme, habit, custom or usage, witnesses and their testimony, and this right is
and the like. (Section 34, Rule 130). not available in respect of hearsay evidence
since the declarant is not in court. (Nuevas,
Q – WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THE RULE ON SIMILAR Ibid., p. 576 citing Donnelly vs. United States, 228
ACTS AS EVIDENCE? U.S. 243)
A – To admit the proof of crimes other that the
particular one with the accused is charged 6. Exceptions to the Hearsay Rule
would be unfair to the accused. It will compel
the defendant to meet the charges of which Q – GIVE THE EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE.
the indictment gives him no information, A – The following:
confuses him in his defense, raises a variety of
issue, and thus diverts the attention of the court a) Dying declaration;
from the charge immediately before it. In fact it b) Declaration against interest;
would be allowing evidence of collateral c) Act or declaration about pedigree;
offenses as substantive evidence of the offense d) Family reputation or tradition regarding
on trial (Martin, Revised Rules on Evidence, p. pedigree;
290 citing 20 Am. Jur. 288-289 e) Common reputation;
f) Part of the res gestae;
Q – GIVE THE RULE ONUNACEPTED OFFER. g) Entries in the course of business;
 h) Entries in official records; Q – IS IT NECESSARY THAT THE DECLARANT STATE
i) Commercial lists and the like; EXPLICITY THAT HE HAD GIVEN HOE OF LIVING?
j) Learned treatises; and A – No. it is not necessary to the validity or
k) Testimony or disposition at a former admissibility of a declaration that the declarant
proceeding. expressly state that he has lost all hope of
recovery; it is sufficient that the circumstances
are such to lead inevitably to the conclusion
that at the time the declaration was made, the
declarant did not expect to survive the injury
Q – GIVE THE RULE ON DYING DECLARATION from which he actually died. (Peole vs. Serrano,
A – The declaration of a dying person, made under 58 Phil. 669)
the consciousness of an impending death, may
be received in any case wherein his death is Q – IS THE INSTANTEOUS DEATH OF DECLARANT
the subject of inquiry, as evidence of the cause SHOULD FOLLOW IMEDIATELY AFTER MAKING HIS
and surrounding circumstances of such death. DYING DECLARATION?
(Sec. 37, Rule 130, Revised Rules on Evidence) A – No. The force of dying declaration is not
affected by the circumstances that the
Q – WHEN IS DYING DECLARATION ADMISSIBLE? declarant did not die until many hours or days
A – When the following requisites concur: afterwards provided he finally did die from the
a) The declaration refers to the cause and wound, whose gravity did not diminish from the
surrounding circumstances of the time he made his declaration until the hour of
declarant’s death; his death. (Ruperto Martin, Revised Rules on
b) The declaration was made under Evidence, Vol. IV, Premium Book Store, 1989 Ed.,
consciousness of impending death; pp. 311-312 citing Moore vs. State, 96 Ten. 209
c) The declaration is offered in a criminal and U.S. vs. Mallari, 29 Phil. 14)
case wherein the subject of inquiry is the
declarant’s death. (Sec. 37, Rule 130; Q – WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF RECOVERY OF
People vs. Sagrario, L-18659, June 29, DECLARANT FATAL WOUND INFLICTED UPON HIM
1965) ON THE ADMISSIBILITY OF DYING DECLARATION?
A – The admissibility of the dying declaration of a
Q – WHAT IS A DYING DECLARATION? deceased person with respect to the person
A – A dying declaration is that made by a person at who inflicted the fatal injury depends upon
the point of death, concerning the case and whether at the time the declaration was made
circumstances of the injury from which he the deceased believed that the injury receive
thereafter dies. (Moran, Remedial Law Review, would be fatal. The circumstances that he
p. 619) thereafter recovered sufficiently to engender
the belief that he was going to live, does not
Q – WHY IS A DYING DECLARATIN ADMISSIBLE? render the declaration inadmissible, where
DISCUSS BRIEFLY. death in fact resulted from the same injury.
A – A dying declaration is admissible on two (People vs. Lara, 54 Phil. 96).
grounds, namely, (a) necessity and (b)
trustworthiness. Necessity, because the Q – IS THE OPINION CONTAINED IN A DYING
declarants’s death makes it impossible to DECLARATION ADMISSIBLE?
obtain his testimony is the best evidence of the A – Opinions in dying declarations are inadmissible.
crime. (U.S. vs. Virrey, 37 Phil. 618) Dying declarations should consists solely of
Trustworthiness, because it is made at the point facts, and not of conclusions, mental
of death, a situation so solemn and awful as impressions or opinions. Thus, a dying statement
creating an obligation equal to that created by that the deceased thought or believed the
a positive oath administered in a court of accused had shot him, or that he expected the
justice. (U.S. vs. Gil, 13 Phil. 530) accused would try to kill him, is inadmissible
where the deceased did not see his assailant,
Q – WHAT IS THE PROBATIVE VALUE OF A DYING but based his declaration wholly upon threats
DECLARATION? which had been made by the accused.
A – It must be received with utmost care and given (Ruperto Martin, Ibid., p. 318 citing state vs.
the same weight as the testimony of a living Horn, 204, No. 528, 103 S.W. 96)
witness. (People vs. Almendralejo, 48 Phil. 268)
Q – EXPLAIN BRIEFLY THE MEANING OF
“CONSCIOUSNESS OF AN IMPENDING DEATH.”
A – The declarant’s belief must be that death was A – The act or declaration of a person deceased,
inevitable, not merely possible, nor even or unable to testify, in respect to the pedigree
probably, but sure. In other words, the of another person related to him by birth or
declarant, at the time he makes his marriage, may be received in evidence
declaration, must have no hope of recovery. where it occured before the controversy, and
If at the time he had an expectation, even the relationship between the two persons is
only a little hope of recovery, the declaration shown by evidence other than such act or
would be inadmissible. Fear, or even belief, declaration. The word “pedigree” includes
that illness end in death, if consistent with relationship, family genealogy, birth, marriage,
hope, is not sufficient. There must be a settled death, the dates when and the places where
hopeless expectation. (Mora, Ibid., p. 621) these facts occurred, and the names of the
relatives. It embraces also facts of family
Q – GIVE THE RULE ON DECLARATION AGAINST history intimately connected with pedigree.
INTEREST. (Sec. 39, Rule 130)
A – The declaration made by a person deceased,
or unable to testify, against the interest of the Q – WHEN IS AN ACT OR DECLARATION ABOUT
declarant, if the fact asserted in the PEDIGREE ADMISSIBLE?
declaration was at the time it was made so A – When the following requisites concur:
far contrary to declarant’s own interest, that a a) The declarant is related to the person
reasonable man in his position would not have whose pedigree is in question;
made the declaration unless he believed it to b) Such relationship is shown by evidence
be true, may be received in evidence against other than the act or declaration;
himself or his successors in interest and against c) The act or declaration was made ante
third person. (Sec. 38, Rule 130) litem motam; and
d) The declarant is dead or unable to testify.
Q – WHY IS A DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST (Sec. 39, Rule 130)
ADMISSIBLE? DISCUSS BRIEFLY.
A – It is admissible on two grounds, name, (a) Q – WHY IS AN ACT OR DECLARATION ABOUT
necessity, and (b) trustworthiness. Necessity, PEDIGREE ADMISSIBLE?
because the declarant is dead or not DISCUSS BRIEFLY?
available as witness, and trustworthiness, A – It is admissible on two grounds, namely (a)
because it is against the declarant’s interest, necessity and (b) trustworthiness. Necessity,
and therefore, a guarantee of its truth. because facts about pedigree are usually those
(Jaime R. Nuevas, Remedial Law Reviewer, which occurred long before the trial and known
1971 Ed., A & J Publishing, p. 581 citing Fitch to only a few persons, and trustworthiness,
vs. Chapman, 10 Conn. 11; Smith vs. Moore, because those facts are matters which
142 N.C. 277) members of the family are presumed to be
interested in ascertaining the truth. (J.Nuevas,
Q – WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMISSIN OF Ibid., p. 582 citing Fulkenson vs. Holmes, 117 U.S.
DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST? 389; III Wigmore 218; Tracy’s Handbook, 62 Ed.,
A – To render a statement admissible as a p. 259
declaration against interest the
following requirements must be met:
a) Declarants must be unavailable as a Q – WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF THE TERM “PEDIGREE”?
witness: A – The word “pedigree” includes:
b) The declaration must have related a a) Relationship;
fact against the apparent pecuniary or b) Family genealogy;
proprietary or moral interest of declarant c) Birth;
when his statement was made. d) Marriage;
c) The declaration must have concerned a e) Death;
fact personally cognizable by declarant. f) Dates when the places where these
d) That circumstances must render it facts occurred;
improbable that a motive to falsify g) Names of relatives; and
existed . (Ruperto Martin, Ibid., p. 327 h) Facts of family history intimately
citing C.J.S. 959) connected with pedigree. (Sec. 39,
Rule 130)
Q – GIVE THE RULE ON ACT OR DECLARATION ABOUT
PEDIGREE.
Q – GIVE THE RULE ON FAMILY REPUTATION OR Q – WHY IS EVIDENCE OF COMMON REPUTATION
TRADITION REGARDING PEDIGREE. ADMISSIBLE ? DISCUSS BRIEFLY?
A – The reputation or tradition existing in a family A – It is admissible on two ground, namely, (a)
previous to the controversy, in respect to the necessity and (b)trustworthiness. Necessity,
pedigree of any one of its members, may be because the fact to be proved is of too ancient
received in evidence if the witness testifying a date such that eye-witnesses are no longer
thereon be also a member of the family, available, and trustworthiness, because if the
either by consanguinity or affinity. Entries in reputation had existed for so long a time, there
family bibles or other family books or charts, be some truth to it. (J. Nuevas, Ibid., p. 584 Mc
engravings on rings, family portraits and the Kinnon vs. Bliss, 21 N.Y. 206; Reg. vs Bedforshire,
like, may be received as evidence of 4E. 535)
pedigree. (Sec. 40, rule 130)
Q – WHEN IS EVIDENCE OF COMMON REPUTATION
Q – WHEN IS FAMILY REPUTATION OR TRADITION NOT HEARSAY? EXPLAIN BRIEFLY.
REGARDING PEDIGREE ADMISSIBLE? A – It is not hearsay if common reputation is the fact
A – When the following requisites concur: in issue, or part thereof. Thus, in a prosecution
a) the reputation or tradition must refer to the for maintenance of a house of ill-fame, a
pedigree of any member of such family; gambling house, or an opium joint, the
b) the reputation or tradition must have been reputation of the house itself is the issue, so
formed previous to the controversy, i.e., that testimony of witnesses thereto is not
ante litem motam and hearsay. (U.S. vs. Choa Chick, 36 Phil. 831)
c) the witness testifying thereto must be a
member of the familiy. (R. Martin, Ibid., p. Q – GIVE THE RULE ON RES GESTAE.
340) A – Statement made by a person while a startling
occurrence is taking place or immediately
Q – MAY FACTS OF PEDIGREE BE PROVED BY prior to subsequent thereto with respect to the
COMMON REPUTATION? circumstances thereof, may be given in
A – No; fact of pedigree, if provable by reputation, evidence as part of the res getae. So, also,
can be proved only by reputation in the statements accompanying an equivocal act
family, but not by reputation in the material to the issue, and giving it a legal
community, except marriage which is significance, may be received as part of the
provable by both family and common res gestae.
reputation. (Sison vs. Amblada, 30 Phil. 118)
Q – WHAT STATEMENTS MAY BE ADMISSIBLE IN
Q – GIVE THE RULE ON COMMON REPUTATION EVIDENCE AS PART OF THE RES GESTAE?
A – Common reputation existing previous to the A – They are of two classes:
controversy, respecting facts of public or a) Spontaneous statements made by a
general interest more than thirty years old or person while a startling occurrence is
respecting marriage or moral character, may taking place or immediately prior or
be given in evidence. Monuments and subsequent thereto with respect to the
inscriptions in public places may be received circumstances thereof; and
as evidence of common reputation. (Sec. 41, b) Statements accompanying an
Rule 130) equivocal act material to the issue, and
giving it legal significance.
Q – WHEN IS EVIDENCE OF COMMON REPUTATION The former is referred to as spontaneous
ADMISSIBLE? exclamations, while the latter as verbal acts.
A – When the following requisites concur:
a) The reputation refers to a matter of Q – DEFINE RES GESTAE,
public or general interest more than A – Res gestae literally means, “thing done,” and
thirty (30) years old; or to marriage or includes the circumstances, facts and
moral character; declarations incidental to the main fact or
b) The reputation is ancient: transaction necessary to illustrate its character.
c) The reputation was formed ante litem It is so connected therewith as to constitute a
motam; and part of the transaction. (R. Martin, Ibid., p. 349
d) The reputation is one formed in the citing Underhill’s Criminal Evidence, p. 348)
community interested. (Sec. 41, Rule
130) Q – WHAT IS ADMISSIBLE AS PART OF THE RES
GESTAE?
A – What is admissible as part of the res gestae are part of the res gestae. (People vs. Talledo, 85
not the details of an occurrence, but the Phil. 533)
human assertions or statements about those
details. Q – WHAT IS AN EQUIVOCAL ACT FOR THE PURPOSE
OF THE RULE ON VERBAL ACTS?
Q – WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES OF SPONTANEOUS A – An equivocal act is one susceptible of various
STATEMENTS? interpretations. (Allen vs. Duncan, 11 pick 308)
A – The requisites for the admissibility of this kind of
evidence as an exception to the rule excluding Q – WHAT ARE VERBAL ACTS? ILLUSTRATE.
hearsay are the following: A – Verbal acts are statements accompanying an
a) Statements must have been made while a equivocal act material to the issue and giving
startling occurrence is taking place or it legal significance. Such declarations are
immediately prior or subsequently thereto; called verbal acts, because they are
b) Such statements must be spontaneous; and considered as verbal parts of the equivocal or
c) Such statements must relate to the ambiguous acts which they explain. For
circumstances of the startling occurrence. example, when one delivers money to
(R. Martin, Ibid., p. 350- 351 citing 32 C.J.S. another, such act does not by itself show
and People vs. Ricaplaza, 23 SCRA 374) whether the money is intended, say as a gift
or as a payment of a debt. But if the act of
Q – WHAT IS THE BASIS OF THE RULE ON RES GESTAE? delivery is accompanied by the statement
A – The principle rests upon the common that the money is for payment of a debt, or is
experience that utterances made under such a birthday gift, the statement gives legal
circumstances are devoid of self-interest, and significance to the act.
are in the same category as exclamations. The
probability of falsehood is so remote as to be Q – MAY AN EQUIVOCAL ACT EXTEND OVER A LONG
negligible. (People vs. Gondayao, 30 SCRA 226) PERIOD OF TIME? MAY THE STATEMENTS
NECESSARY FOR AN UNDERSTANDING OF SUCH
Q – WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES OF VERBAL ACTS? EQUIVOCAL ACT BE ADMISSIBLE AS VERBAL
A – The requisites of verbal acts are: ACTS?
a) The res gestae is an equivocal act; A – The equivocal act may extend over a long
b) The equivocal act must be material to period of time, and during that period, those
the issue; statements that are necessary for an
c) The statement in question must be understanding of the meaning of said
necessary for the understanding of the equivocal act, are admissible as verbal acts.
equivocal act; and If a man and a woman are cohabiting
d) The statement must accompany the together and for a certain period of time they
equivocal act. (J. Nuevas, Ibid., p. 587 have been appearing in public together,
citing Tracy’s Handbook, 62 Ed., p 22). there is here an equivocal conduct which
may be interpreted either as licit or illicit.
Q – WHY ARE SPONTANEOUS EXCLAMATIONS AND According to the present rule, any statements
VERBAL ACTS made by the parties during such equivocal
ADMISSIBLE/ DISCUSS BRIEFLY? conduct showing it to be matrimonial,
A – The are admissible on two ground, namely, (a) meretricious or otherwise, are admissible as
necessity and (b) trustworthiness. Necessity, verbal acts. (Morann, Ibid., p. 636 citing
because such natural and spontaneous Matter of Taylor, 9 Paige (N.Y.), 611)
utterances are more convincing than the
testimony of the same person on the stand; and Q – GIVE THE RULE ON ENTRIES IN THE COURSE OF
trustworthiness, because those statements are BUSINESS.
made instinctively. (Jaime Nuevas, Ibid., p. 587 A – Entries made at, or near the time of the
citing Mobile vs. Ascraft, 48 Ala. 31 and Wesley transactions to which they refer, by a person
vs. State, 53 Ala. 182) deceased, or unable to testify, who was in a
position to known the facts therein stated,
Q – DISTINGUISH BETWEEN A DYING DECLARATION maybe received as prima facie evidence, if
AND A DECLARATION AS PART OF THE RES such person made the entries in h is
GESTAE. professional capacity or in the performance
A – If the requsites of a dying declaration do not of duty and in the ordinary or regular course
concur, the declaration may be admitted as of business or duty (Sec. 43, Rule 130)
Q – WHEN ARE ENTRIES IN THE COURSE OF BUSINESS admissibility are present. (Shove vs. Wiley, 18
ADMISSIBLE? Mass. 558)
A – When the following requisites concur:
a) The entries must have been made at or Q – GIVE THE RULE ON OFFICIAL ENTRIES.
near the time of the transaction to which A – Entries in official records made in the
they refer; performance of h is duty by a public officer of
b) The person who made the entry must be, the Philippines, or by a person in the
at the time the entry is presented as performance of a duty especially enjoined
evidence, deceased, outside of the bylaw, are prima facie evidence of the facts
Philippines or unable to testify; therein stated. (Sec. 44, Rule 130)
c) The person who made the entry must be in
a position to know the facts there in stated Q – WHEN ARE ENTRIS IN OFFICIAL RECORDS
at the time he made the entries; ADMISSIBLE?
d) The entries must have been made in his A – To render such entries admissible the following
professional capacity or in the requisites concur:
performance of duty; and a) The entry must be made by a public
e) The entries must have been made in the officer or by another person especially
ordinary or regular course of business. enjoined by law to do so;
(Ruperto G. Martin, Revised Rules on b) It must be made by a public officer in the
Evidence, vol. IV. 1989 Ed., p. 363) performance of a duty specially enjoined
by law; and
Q – WHY ARE ENTRIES IN THE COURSE OF BUSINESS c) The entrant must have personal
ADMISSIBLE? DISCUSS BRIEDLY. knowledge of the facts stated by him.
A – They are admissible on two grounds, namely, (Ruperto Martin. Ibd., p. 370 citing V.
(a) necessity, and (b trustworthiness. Wigmore on Evidence, p.
Necessity, because the entrant is dead or not
available as witness, and no equally Q – WHY ARE ENTRIES IN OFFICIAL RECORDS
satisfactory proof of the entry can be had; ADMISSIBLE? DISCUSS BRIEFLY.
and trustworthiness, because a man who A – They are admissible on two grounds, namely,
makes regular entries for purposes of business (a) necessity, and (b) trustworthiness.
or duty usually makes them with accuracy. As Necessity, because litigations are numberless
these entries are relied upon by businessmen in which the testimony of public officials is
everyday they can be relied upon the courts. required, and trustworthiness, because the
(J. Nuevas, Ibid., p. 589 citing Welsh vs. Barret, law reposes a particular confidence in public
15 Mass. 380 and Tracy’s Handbook, 62 Ed., p. officials such that is presumes that they will
276) discharge their duties with fidelity and
accuracy. (Antillon vs. Barcelon, 37 Phil. 148)
Q – IN SHORT, TO WHAT KIND OF ENTRIES DOES THIS
RULE REFER? Q – WHAT IS THE PROBATIVE VALUE OF ENTRIES IN
A – It refers to an entry made by a person whose OFFICIAL RECORDS?
business or duty it was to make the entry, and A – They are prima facie evidence of the fact
which appears to be part of a regular system therein entered. (Sec. 44, Rule 130)
of entries kept in that establishment. (Jaime
Nuevas, Ibid., p. 590 citing O’Day vs. Spencer, Q – GIVE THE RULE ON COMMERCIAL LISTS.
189 Pac. 394; Kibbe vs. Bancraft, 77 III. 19) A – Evidence of statements of matters of interest to
persons engaged in an occupation
Q – IF THE ENTRANT IS ALIVE WOULD HIS ENTRY BE contained in a list, register, periodical, or other
RECEIVABLE AS INDEPENDENT EVIDENCE? published compilation is admissible as tending
A – No; the entrant must be presented as witness. to proved the truth of any relevant matter so
However, while on the stand, he can refer to stated if that compilation is published for use
his entry as memorandum to refresh his by persons engaged in that occupation and
memory. (Cang Ui vs. Gardner, 34 Phil. 376). is generally used and relied upon by them
But, if notwithstanding the aid of his entry as a therein. (Sec. 45, Rule 130).
memorandum, the entrant cannot recollect
the facts stated therein, then his entry is Q – WHEN ARE COMMERCIAL LIST AND THE LIKE
admissible as independent evidence, ADMISSIBLE?
provided all the other requisites for its A – When the following requisites concur:
a) such statements are contained in a list;
 b) the compilation is published for use by Q – IS THE TESTIMONY GIVEN BEFORE A LEGISLATIVE
person engaged in that occupation; and OR ADMINSITRATIVE COMMITTEE ADMISSIBLE IN
c) it is generally used and relied upon by A SUBSEQUENT PROCEEDING?
them therein. (Ruperto Martin, ibid., p. 378) A – No, because they are not judicial in character.
Besides, in legislative and administrative
Q – WHEN ARE THESE COMMERCIAL LISTS AND THE investigations, the rules of evidence are not
LIKE ADMISSIBLE? binding. (Moran, Ibid., p. 645)
A – They are admissible if published for use by
persons engaged in that occupation, and is 7. Opinion Rules
generally used and relied upon by them.
(Sec. 45, Rule 130) Q – DISCUSS BRIEFLY THE OPINION RULE.
A – As a rule, a witness must confine his testimony
Q – GIVE THE RULES ON LEARNED TREATISES. to matters within his actual knowledge. He
A – A published treatise, periodical or pamphlet on cannot be asked questions calling for his
a subject of history, law, science or art is opinion or conclusions upon facts, which are
admissible as tending to prove the truth of a for the court to make. (J. Nuevas, Ibid., p 595
matter stated therein if the court takes judicial citing 20 Am. Jur. 635). Hence, the opinion of
notice, or a witness expert in the subject a witness is not admissible. (Sec. 48, Rules 130)
testifies, that the writer of the statement in the
treatise periodical or pamphlet is recognized Q – GIVE THE EXCEPTIONS TO THE OPINION RULE.
in his profession or calling as expert in the A – The following are admissible:
subject. (Sec. 46, Rule 130)
a) The opinion of a witness on a matter
Q – WHEN ARE LEARNED TREATISES ADMISSIBLE? requiring special knowledge, skill,
A – They are admissible if the fact therein stated experience or training which he is shown
can be judicially noticed, or if another expert to possess, may be received in evidence.
testifies that the author is a recognized expert (Sec. 49, Rule 130)
on the subject. (Sec. 46, Rule 130). b) The opinion of a witness for which proper
basis is given, may be received in
Q – GIVE THE RULE ON TESTIMONY OR DEPOSITION AT evidence regarding.
A FORMER PROCEEDING. 1. The identity of a person about
A – The testimony or deposition of a witness whom he has adequate
deceased or unable to testify, given in a knowledge;
former caser of proceeding, judicial or 2. A handwriting with which he has
administrative, involving the same parties and sufficient familiarity; and
subject matter, may be given in evidence 3. The mental sanity of a person with
against the adverse party who had the whom he is sufficiently
opportunity to cross-examine him. (Sec. 47, acquainted.
Rule 130) c) The witness may also testify on his
impressions of the emotion, behavior,
Q – WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES IN ORDER THAT THE condition or appearance of a person. (Sc.
TESTIMONY OR DEPOSITION OF A WITNESS AT A 50, Rule 130)
FORMER PROCEEDING MAY BE ADMISSIBLE AS
EVIDENCE IN A SUBSEQUENT PROCEEDING? Q – WHEN IS EXPERT EVIDENCE ADMISSIBLE?
A – There are five requisites: A – When the following requisites concur:
a) That the testimony was rendered in a a) The fact to be proved is one requiring
former case; expert knowledge; and
b) Between the same parties; b) The witness is really an expert. (Nuevas,
c) Relating to the same matter; Ibid., p. 595 citing 20 Am. Jur. 647-649)
d) That the witness is dead, out of the
Philippines, or unable to testify in the Q – WHAT IS MEANT BY “QUALIFYING THE WITNESS”?
subsequent proceeding; and HOW IS IT DONE?
e) That the adverse party has had an A – “Qualifying the witness” means proving that the
opportunity to cross-examine the witness. witness presented is an expert, and this is
(Moran, Ibid., p. 645) done by asking him preliminary questions as to
his education, training, experience, and the
like. (Nuevas, Ibid., p. 596 citing Tracy’s
Handbook, 62 Ed., p. 207)
 of an expert is necessary. (Torres vs. Lopex, 48
Q – WHAT IS MEANT OF OPINION EVIDENCE? Phil. 772)
A – “Opinion evidence” as the term is used in law,
means the testimony of a witness, given or Q – IS EXPERT EVIDENCE NECESSSARY IN THE
offered in the trial of an action, that the IDENTIFICAITON OF FINGERPRINTS?
witness is of the opinion that some fact A – Yes, because it is a science requiring close
pertinent to the case exists or does not exists, study. (People vs. Medina, 59 Phil. 330)
offered as proof of the existence or non-
existence of the fact. (R. Martin, Ibid., p. 396 8. Character Evidence
citing 20 Am. Jur. 634)
Q – GIVE THE RULES GOVERNING CHARACTER
EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL CASES.
Q – WHAT IS THE PROBATIVE VALUE OF EXPERT A – The following:
TESTIMONY? a) The accused may prove his good moral
A – Expert testimony no doubt constitutes evidence character which is pertinent to the moral
worthy of meeting consideration although not involved in the offense charged.
exclusive on questions of a professional b) Unless in rebuttal, the prosecution may not
character. Courts of justice, however, are not prove his bad moral character which is
bound to submit their findings necessarily to pertinent to the moral trait involved in the
such testimony. They are free to weigh, them, offense charged.
and they can give or refuse to give them any c) The good or bad moral character of the
value as proof, or they can even counter- offended party may be proved if it tends
balance such evidence with the other to establish in any reasonable degree the
elements of conviction which may have been probability or improbability of the offense
adduced during the trial. (R. Martin, Ibid., p. charged. (Sec. 51, Rule 130).
409 U.S. vs. Trono, et. al., 3 Phil. 219-220).
Q – DEFINE CHARACTER
Q – DEFINE EXPERT EVIDENCE. A – Character is defined s that “combination of
A – Expert Evidence may be defined as the properties, qualities or peculiarities which
testimony of one possessing in regard to a distinguishes one person from others.” (Martin,
particular subject or department of human Ibid., p. 420 citing The Cmaberlayne Trial
activity, knowledge not usually acquired by Evidence, p. 578)
other persons. (U.S.A vs Gil, 13 Phil. 530)
Q – IS EVIDENCE OF GOOD CHARACTER OF THE
Q – WHEN IS EXPERT EVIDENCE NECESSARY? ACCUSED ADMISSIBLE IN CRIMINAL CASES?
A – Expert evidence is necessary when there are A – The good character of an accused is admissible
certain matters which do not come within the in evidence to show that improbability of his
knowledge of ordinary witnesses. (Moran, doing the act charged. The principle upon
Ibid., p. 650) which good character may be proven is, that
it affords a presumption against the
Q – WHEN IS EXPERT EVIDENCE NECESSSARY TO commission of crime. This presumption arises
PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF A HANDWRITING? from the improbability, as a general rule, as
A – When the genuineness of handwriting is to be proven by common observation and
proven by comparison expert evidence is experience, that a person who has uniformly
necessary. Whether or not the handwriting in pursued an honest and upright course of
questions is similar to other writings of the conduct will depart from it and do an ct so
same person is a matter which requires the inconsistent with it. Such a person may be
testimony of a man who has been trained, or overcome by temptation and fall into crime,
has actual skill or knowledge on the same. and cases of that kind often occur, but they
(U.S. vs. Santiago, 41 Phil. 793,802) are exceptions; the general rule is otherwise.
(Moran, p. 656 citing Cancemi vs. People, 16
Q – WHEN IS EXPERT EVIDENCE NECESSARYTO PROVE N.Y. 501)
MENTAL INSANITY?
A – Mental insanity may be proven by the opinion Q – MAY THE PROSECUTION PROVE THE BAD MORAL
of ordinary witnesses, but when the mental CHARACTER OF THE ACCUSED?
disease is to be inferred from an examination A – The prosecution is not permitted to impeach
and observation of its symptoms, the opinion the character of an accused, if the latter
does not put it in issue by giving evidence in
 his support. (People vs. Hodges, 48 Phil. 592). out of such declaration, act or omission,
The reason for the rule is that evidence of bad be permitted to falsify it;
character may create an unfair prejudice b) The tenant is not permitted to deny the
against the acused who may be convicted title of his landlord at the time of the
not because he is guilty of the crime charged, commencement of the relation of the
but because of his being a crooked man. landlord and tenant between them. (Sec.
(Moran, Ibid., p. 657 citing People vs. Shen, 2 Rule 131)
147 N. Y. 78, 41 N.E. 508)
Q – WHAT IS A PRESUMPTION?
RULE 131 A – A presumption is an inference as to the
BURDEN OF PROOF AND PRESUMPTION existence of a fact not actually known, arising
from its usual connection with another which is
Q – WHAT IS BURDEN OF PROOF? known. (Jaime Nuevas, Ibid., p. 602 citing III
A – Burden of proof is the duty of a party to C.R. Co. vs. Interstate Co., 206)
present evidence on the facts in issue
necessary to establish his claim or defense by Q – WHAT ARE THE CLASSES OF PRESUMPTIONS OF
the amount of evidence required by law. LAW?
(Sec. 1, Rule 131) A – There are two classes of presumptions of law:
Q – DEFINE BURDEN OF EVIDENCE. (a) conclusive presumptions or presumptions
A – “Burden of Evidence” is defined as “that logical juris et de jure and (b) disputable presumption
necessity which rests on a party at any or presumption juris tantum. Conclusive
particular time during a trial to create a prima presumptions are inferences which the law
facie case in his own favor, or to overthrow makes so peremptory that it will not allow
one when created against him. The burden them to be overturned by any contrary proof
of evidence is determined by the progress of however strong. (Mercado vs. Santos, 66 Phil.
the trial, and shifts to one party when the 216) Disputable presumptions are those
other party has produced sufficient evidence presumptions which may be disputed,
to be entitled as a matter of law to a ruling in opposed, refuted or rebutted. Such
his favor. (R. Martin, Ibid, p. 431 citing 2 Jones presumptions continue until overcome by
on Evidence. 2nd Ed., 355) proof to the contrary or by some stronger
presumption. (R. Martin, Ibid., p 447 citing
Q – WHO HAS THE BURDEN OF PROOF IN CRIMINAL Annotation: Ann. Cas. 1917 E. 11221).
CASES? WHY?
A – In criminal cases, the burden of proof as to the Q – IS PRESUMPTION AN EVIDENCE?
offense charged lies on the prosecution A – No. The effect of a presumption is to do away
(People vs. De Reyes, 82 Phil. 130), because with evidence. It is not evidence, even
the accused has in his favor the presumption though it takes the place of it in the trial of
of innocence. causes. (R. Martin, Ibid., p. 448 citing The
Chamberlayne Trial Evidence, p. 732)
Q – WHAT IS THE BURDEN OF PROOF TO REBUT THE
PRESUMPTION OF CRIMINAL INTENT? Q – WHAT IS ESTOPPEL IN PAIS?
A – When it has been proven that the accused A – Whenever a party has, by his own declaration,
committed the unlawful acts alleged, it is act or omission, intentionally and deliberately
properly presumed that they were committed led another to believe a particular thing true,
with full knowledge and with criminal intent, and to act upon such belief, he cannot, in
and it is incumbent upon them to rebut such any litigation arising out of such declaration,
presumption. (R. Martin, Ibid., p. 441 citing act or omission, be permitted to falsify it. (Sec.
State vs. Sullivan, 34 Idaho 68, 199 p. 647, 17 2, par. (a)Rule 131)
A.L.R. 902)
Q – WHAT IS THEREASON FOR THE RULE ON ESTOPPEL
Q – GIVE THE RULE ON CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTION. IN PAIS?
A – The following are instances of conclusive A – The doctrine of estoppel in pais or equitable
presumptions. estoppel is said to be dictated by the
a) Whenever a party has, by his own principles of morality and fair dealing and it
declaration, act, or omission, intentionally intended to subserve the ends of justice. It
and deliberately led another to believe a concludes the truth in order to prevent fraud
particular thing true and to act upon such and falsehood and imposes silence on a party
belief, he cannot, in any litigation arising only when in conscience and honesty he
 should not be allowed to speak. (R. Martin, m) That official duty has been regularly
Ibid., p. 449 citing 19 Am. Jur. 641). Through performed;
estoppel an admission or presentation is n) That a court, or judge acting as such,
rendered conclusive upon the person making whether in the Philippines or elsewhere
it and cannot be denied or disproved as was acting in the lawful exercise of
against the person relying thereon. (Art. 1431, jurisdiction;
New Civil Code of the Philippines) o) That all the matters within an issue raised in
a case were laid before the court and
Q – WHO MAY INVOKE ESTOPPEL? passed upon by it; and in like manner that
A – An equitable estoppel can only be invoked by all matters within an issue raised in a
one who is in a position to be misled by the dispute submitted for arbitration were laid
misrepresentation with respect to which the before the arbitrators and passed upon by
estopped is invoked; and under them;
circumstances where damage would result to p) The private transactions have been fair
him from the adoption by the person and regular;
estopped of a position different from that q) That the ordinary course of business has
which has been held out to be true. (Cristobal been followed;
vs. Gomez, 50 Phil 810) r) That there was a sufficient consideration
for a contract;
Q – GIVE THE INSTANCES WHERE THERE IS s) That a negotiable instrument was given or
DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTIONS. indorsed for a sufficient consideration;
A – The following presumptions are satisfactory if t) That an endorsement of a negotiable
uncontradicted, but may be contradicted instrument was made before the
and overcome by other evidence: instrument was overdue and at the place
a) That a person is innocent of crime or where the instrument is dated;
wrong; u) That a writing is truly dated;
b) That an unlawful act was done with an v) That a letter duly directed and mailed
unlawful intent; was received in the regular course of the
c) That a person intends the ordinary mail;
consequences of his voluntary act; w) That after an absence of seven years, it
d) That a person takes ordinary care of his being unknown whether or not the
concerns; absentee still lives, he is considered dead
e) That evidence willfully suppressed would for all purposes, except for those of
be adverse if produced; succession.
f) That money paid by one to another was
due to the latter; The absentee shall not be considered dead
g) That a thing delivered by one to another for the purpose of opening his succession till after
belonged to the latter; an absence of ten years. If he disappeared after
h) That an obligation delivered up to the the age of seventy-five years, an absence of five
debtor has been paid; years shall be sufficient in order that his succession
i) That prior rents or installments had been may be opened.
paid when a receipt for the latter ones is
produced; The following shall be considered dead for all
j) That a person found in possession of a purposes including the division of the estate
thing in the doing of a recent wrongful act among the heirs:
is the taker and the doer of the whoe act;
otherwise, that things which a person (1) A person on board a vessel lost during a
possesses, or exercises acts of ownership sea voyage, or an aircraft which is
over, are owned by him; missing , who has not been heard for
k) That a person in possession of an order on four years since the lost of the vessel or
himself for the payment of the money, or aircraft;
the delivery of anything, has paid, the (2) A member of the armed forces who has
money, or the delivery of anything, has taken part in armed hostilities, and has
paid the money or delivered the thing been missing for four years;
accordingly; (3) A person who has been in danger of
l) That a person acting in a public office was death under other circumstances and
regularly appointed or elected to it; whose existence has not been known
for four years;
 (4) If a married person has been absent for (1) A child born before one hundred
four consecutive years, the house eighty days after the solemnization
present may contract a subsequent of the subsequent marriage is
marriage if he or she has a well-founded considered to have been
belief that the absent spouse is already conceived during the former
dead. In case of disappearance, marriage, provided it be born
where there is danger of death under within the three hundred days after
the circumstances hereinabove the termination of the marriage;
provided, an absence of only two years
shall be sufficient for the purpose of (2) A child born after one hundred
contracting a subsequent marriage. eighty days following the
However, in any case, before marrying celebration of the subsequent
again, the spouse present must institute marriage is considered to have
a summary proceeding as provided in been conceived during such
the Family Code and in the rules of a marriage, even though it be born
declaration of presumptive death of the within the three hundred days after
absentee, without prejudice to the the termination of the former
effect of reappearance of the absent marriage.
spouse. (ee) That a thing once proved to exist
continues as long as is usual with
x) That acquiescence resulted from a belief things of that nature;
that the thing acquiesced in was (ff) That the law has been obeyed;
conformable to the law or fact; (gg) That a printed or published book,
y) That things have happened according to purporting to be printed or
the ordinary, course of nature and the published by public authority, was so
ordinary habits of life; printed or published;
z) That persons acting as copartners have (hh) That a printed or published book,
entered into a contract of copartnerhsip; purporting to contain reports o cases
adjudged in tribunals of the country
(aa) That a man and woman deporting where the book is published,
themselves as husband and wife contains correct reports of such
have entered into a lawful contract cases;
of marriage; (ii) That a trustee or other person whose
(bb) That properly acquired by a man duty it was to convey real property
and a woman who are capacitated to a particular person has actually
to marry each other as husband and conveyed it to him when such
wife without the benefit of marriage presumption is necessary to perfect
or under a void marriage, has been the title of such person or his
obtained by their joint efforts, work or successor in interest.
industry.
(cc) That in cases of cohabitation by a (jj) That except for purposes of
man and a woman who are not succession, when two person perish
capacitated to marry each other in the same calamity, such as wreck,
and who have acquired property battle, or conflagration, and it is not
through their actual joint shown who died first, and there are
contribution of money, property or no particular circumstances from
industry, such contributions and their which it can be inferred the
corresponding shares including joint survivorship is determined from the
deposits of money and evidences of probabilities resulting from the
credit are equal. strength and age of the sexes,
(dd) t if the marriage is terminated and according to the following rules:
the mother contracted another
marriage within three hundred days (1) If both were under the age of
after such termination of the former fifteen years, the older is
marriage, these rules shall govern in deemed to have survived;
the absence of proof to the (2) If both were abovethe age of
contrary; sixty, the younger is deemed to
have survived;
 (3) If one is under fifteen and the Q – DISTINGUISH PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE
other above sixty, the former is FROM REASONABLE DOUBT.
deemed to have survived; A – In making the distinction between the terms
(4) If both be over fifteen and under “presumption of innocence” and of
sixty, and the sex be different, “reasonable doubt”, it has been stated that
the male is deemed to have “presumption of innocence” is a conclusion
survived; if the sex be the same, drawn by law in favor of a citizen , while
the older; “reasonable” doubt” is a condition of mind
(5) If one be under fifteen or over produced by proof resulting from evidence in
sixty, and the other between the case. The former is regarded as
those ages, the latter is deemed evidence, introduced by the law to be
to have survived. considered by the court, while the latter is the
result of insufficient proof. (Vicente J.
(kk) That if there is doubt, as between Francisco, Ibid., 81 citing 10 Encyclopedia of
two or more persons who are called Evidence, 625).
to succeed each other, as to which
of them died first, whoever alleges Q – EXPLAIN THE PRESUMPTION “THAT AN UNLAWFUL
the death of one prior to the other, ACT WAS DONE WITH AN UNLAWFUL INTENT.”
shall proved the same; in the A – The general rule is that, if it is proved that the
absence of proof, they shall be accused committed a the unlawful act
considered to have died at the charged, it will be presumed that the act was
same time. (Sec. 3, Rule 131) done with a criminal intention, and it is for the
accused to rebut this presumption. The act in
itself is evidence of the intent. (Vicente J.
Q – WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THE PRESUMPTION OF Francisco, Ibid., p. 82 citing 16 C.J. 81)
INNOCENCE?
A – A person accused of crime is presumed to be Q – EXPLAINT EH PRESUMTION “THAT A PERSON
innocent until the contrary is proved and this INTENDS THE ORDINARY CONSEQUENCES OF
presumption remains with him throughout the HIS VOLUNTARY ACT.”
trial until it is overcome by proof of guilt A – Though it is maxim of law, as well as the dictate
beyond a reasonable doubt. The of charity, that every person is to be
presumption of innocence is founded upon presumed innocent until he is proved to be
the first principles of justice and is not a mere guilty, yet it is a rule equally sound that every
form, but a substantial part of the law. sane person must be supposed to intended
The presumption of innocence is a that which is the ordinary and natural
conclusion of law in favor of the accused, consequences of his own purposed act. (V.J.
whereby his innocence is not only established Francisco, Ibid., p. 84 citing 3 Green Evidence,
but continues until sufficient evidence is 15th ed., 13)
introduced to overcome the proof which the
law has created – namely, his innocence.
When a doubt is created, it is the result of Q – EXPLAIN THE PRESUMPTION “THAT A PERSON
proof, and not the proof itself. The courts will INTENDS THE ORDINARY CONSEQUENCES OF
not impute a guilty construction or inference HIS VOLUNTARY ACT”.
compatible with innocence arises therefrom A – Men of sound mind are presumed to intend
with equal force and fairness. In fact, it si the natural and necessary consequences of
always the duty of the court to resolve the acts which they intentionally perform.
circumstances of evidence upon a theory of (Ruperto G. Martin, Revised Rules on
innocence rather than upon a theory of guilt Evidence, Vol. IV 1989 ed., p. 465 citing 1
where it is possible to do so. The accused is Jones on Evidence, 2nd Ed., 210). It is said that
not to be presumed guilty because the facts man intends that consequence which he
are consistent with his guilt; this will be done contemplates and which he expects to result
where the facts are inconsistent with his from his act, and he, therefore, must be taken
innocence. (Vicente J. Francisco, The Revised to intend every consequence which is the
Rules of Court in the Philippines (Evidence), natural and immediate result of any act which
Vol, VII, Part I, 1990 Ed., p. 79-80 citing he voluntarily does. (Ibid).
Wharton’s Criminal Evidence, 11th Ed., Sec.
72).
Q – IN ORDER THAT THE ADVERSE PRESUMPTION
FROM SUPPRESSION OF EVIDENCE MAY ARISE, Q – IN THOSE CASES WHERE DEATH MAY BE
WHAT ARE THERE REQUISITES? PRESUMED, IS THERE A PRESUMPTION AS TO THE
A – The following must concur: EXACT DATE OF DEATH?
a) The suppression is willful; (Sec. 3, Rule A – None; the exact date of death is a matter of
131) proof. (J. Nuevas, Ibid., p 607 citing Davis vs.
b) The suppression is not in the exervcise of Briggs, 97 U.S. 628)
a privilege; (U.S. vs. Melchir, 2 Phil. 588)
c) The evidence suppressed is not merely Q – WHEN ARE PRESUMPTIONS ADMISSIBLE?
corroborative or cumulative; (People vs. A – The are admissible when the facts from which
Tuazon, 56 Phil. 649) and they may be deduced are fully proven; a
d) The evidence is at the disposal only of presumption cannot be made to rest on
the suppressing party. (People vs. Otero, another presumption. (Cuaycong vs. Rius, 86
51 Phil 201) Phil. 170)

Q – WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF NON-PRODUCTION OF Q – WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF PRESUMPTIONS?

MATERIAL EVIDENCE BY A PARTY? A – Presumptions do not constitute evidence and
A – Non-production of evidence that would have no weight as such, but only determined
naturally have been produced by an honest the party who has the duty of presenting
and, therefore,, fearless claimant permits the evidence, and when that duty is met,
inference that its tenor is unfavorable to the presumptions recede. (Nuevas, Ibd., p. 608
party’s cause. (Marvel Corp. vs. David, 94 citing Anno. 15 A.L.R. 881) In other words,
Phil. 376) presumptions merely aid in establishing a
prima facie case and have no probative
Q – IN ORDER THAT THE ADVERSE PRESUMPTION effect when countervailing proof is offered.
FROM POSSESSION OF STOLEN GOODS MAY (J. Nuevas, Ibid., p. 608 citing 20 Am. Jur. 171)
ARISE, WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES?
A – The following must concur:
a) The crime of theft or robbery was
committed; (U.S. vs. Carreon, 12 Phil.) 51). Q – GIVE THE RULE ON THE PRESUMPTION OF
b) It was committed recently; (U.S. VS. Carlipio,, LEGITIMACY OR ILLEGITIMACY OF A CHILD.
18 Phil. 421) A – There is no presumption of legitimacy or
c) The property object ofthecrime was found in illegitimacy of a child born after three
accused’s possession; (U.S. vs. Ungal, 37 Phil. hundred days following the dissolution of the
835) and marriage of the separation of the spouses.
d) The accccused is unable to explain his Whoever alleged the legitimacy or
possession satisfactorily; (U.S. vs. Espia, 16 illegitimacy of such child must prove his
Phil. 506) anmd, or for the application of the allegation. (Sec. 4, Rule 131)
presumption of doer of the whole act.
e) It must be shown that the goods were
looted at the same time, in the ssame place RULE 132
and on the same occasion. (People vs. De PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE
Jose, CA-G-R. No. 02352- CR, Jan. 31, 1963)
A. Examination of Witness
Q – WHAT PRESUMPTION ARISES FROM FABRICATION
OF EVIDENCE? Q – HOW MAY THE EXAMINATION OF A WITNESS BE
A – The presumption arises that the case is DONE?
groundless and affects the whole mass of A – The examination of witnesses presented in a trial
evidence presented by the party. (De Leon or hearing shall be done in open court, and
vs. Layco, 73 Phil. 588) under oath or affirmation. Unless the witness is
incapacitated to speak, or the question calls
Q – WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF THE PRESUMPTION OF for a different mode of answer, the answers of
REGULARITY OF OFFICAL ACTS? the witnesses shall be given orally. (Sec. 1)
A – It includes regularity of appointment and
performance of duty (Tolentino vs Catoy, 82 Q – MUST A WITNESS ANSWER ANY QUESTION
Phil. 300) and applies to corporate officers. (J. ASKED?
Nuevas, Remedial Law Reviewer, 1971 ed., p.
605)
A – Yes, a witness must answer questions, although Re-cross-examination. – Upon the
his answer may tend to establish a claim conclusion of the re-direct examination, the
against him (Sec. 3) adverse party may re-cross-examine the
witness on matters stated in his re-direct
Q – WHAT ARE THE RIGHTS OF A WITNESS? examination, and also on such other matters
A – The rights of a witness are: as may be allowed by the court in its
a) To be protected from irrelevant, improper, discretion. (Sec. 8)
or insulting questions, and from harsh or
insulting demeanor;
b) Not to be detained longer than the Q – WHEN MAY A WITNESS BE RECALLED?
interests of justice require; A – After the examination of a witness by both sides
c) Not to be examined exception as to has been concluded, the witness cannot be
matters pertinent to the issue; recalled without leave of the court. The court
d) Not to give an answer which will tend to will grant or withhold leave in its discretion, as
subject him to a penalty for an offense the interest of justice may require.
unless otherwise provided by law; or
e) Not to give an answer which will tend to Q – WHAT IS A LEADING QUESTION?
degrade his reputation, unless it be to the A – A leading question is one which suggest to the
very fact at issued to a fact from which witness the answer which the examining party
the fact in issue would presumed. But a desires. (Sec. 10)
witness must answer to the fact of his
previous final conviction for an offenses. Q – ARE LEADING QUESTIONS ALLOWED ON DIRECT
(Sec. 3) EXAMINATION?
A – As a general rule, they are not allowed, except
Q – STATE THE ORDER OF EXAMINATION OF AN in the following cases
INDIVIDUAL WITNESS a) On cross examination;
A – The order in which an individual witnesses may b) On preliminary matters;
be examined is as follows: c) When there is difficulty in getting direct
a) Direct examination by the proponent; and intelligible answers from a witness who
b) Cross-examination by the opponent; is ignorant, or a child of tender years, or is
c) Re-direct examination by the proponent; of feeble mind or a deaf-mute;
d) Re-cross-examination by the opponents. d) Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or
(Sec. 4) e) Of a witness who is an adverse party, or
an officer, director, or managing agent of
Q – GIVE THE CONCEPTS AND PURPOSES OF DIRECT a public or private corporation or of a
EXAMINATION; CROSS EXAMINATION; partnership or association which is an
REDIRECT EXAMINATION AND RE-CROSS- adverse party. (Sec. 10)
EXAMINATION.
A – Direct examination is the examination-in-chief Q – WHAT IS A MISLEADING QUESTION?
of a witness by the party presenting him on A – A misleading question is one which assumed as
the facts relevant to the issue. (Sec. 5) true a fact not yet testified to by the witness,
Cross-examination; its purpose and or contrary to that which he has previously
extent. Upon the termination of the direct stated. It is not allowed (Sec. 10)
examination, the witness may be cross-
examined by the adverse party as to any Q – HOW MAY THE ADVERSE PARTY’S WITNESS BE
matters stated in the direct examination, or IMPEACHED?
connected therewith, with sufficient fullness A – A witness may be impeached by the party
and freedom to test his accuracy and against whom he was called, by
truthfulness and freedom from interest or bias, contradictory evidence,by evidence that his
or the reverse, and to elicit all important facts general reputation for truth, honesty, or
bearing upon the issue. (Sec. 6) integrity is bad, or by evidence that he has
Re-direct examination; its purpose and made at other times statements inconsistent
extent. – After the cross-examination pf the with his present testimony, but not by
witness has been concluded, he may be re- evidence of particular wrongful acts, except
examined by the party calling him, to explain that it may be shown by the examination of
or supplement his answers given during the the witness, or the record of the judgment,
cross-examination, may be allowed by the that he has been convicted of an offense.
court in its discretion. (Sec. 7) (Sec. 11)
Q – WHAT IS IMPEACHMENT OF A WITNESS? A – A witness may be allowed to refresh his
A – it is simply an attack on the credibility of a memory respecting a fact, by anything
witness. (J. Nuevas, Remedial Law Reviewer, written or recorded by himself or under his
1971 Ed., P. 611 citing Ballentines’s Law Dict. direction at the time when the fact occurred,
2nd Ed., p. 610) or immediately thereafter, or at any other
time when the fact was fresh in his memory
Q – MAY A PARTY IMPEACH HIS OWN WITNESS? and he knew that the same was correctly
A – As a rule, no, except, if the witness is an written or recorded; but in such case the
unwilling or hostile witness or if the witness is an writing or record must be produced and may
adverse party of an officer, director, or be inspected by the adverse party, who may,
managing agent of a public or private if he chooses, cross-examined the witness
corporation or a partnership or association upon it, and may read it in evidence. So, also,
which is an adverse party. (Sec. 12) a witness may testify from such a writing or
record, though he retain no recollection of
Q – WHEN MAY A WITNESS MAY BE CONSIDERED AS the particular facts, if he is able to swear that
UNWILLING OR HOSTILE? the writing or record correctly stated the
A – A witness may be considered as unwilling or transaction when made; but such evidence
hostile only if so declared by the court upon must be received with caution. (Sec. 16)
adequate showing of his adverse interest,
unjustified reluctance to testify of his having Q – STATE THE RULE WHEN PART OF AN ACT,
misled the party into calling him to the witness DECLARATION OR WRITING IS GIVEN IN
stand. (Sec. 12) EVIDENCE BY ONE PARTY.
A – When part of an act, declaration, conversation,
Q – HOW MAY A WITNESS BE IMPEACED BY writing or record is given in evidence by one
EVIDENCE OF INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS? party, the whole of the same subject may be
A – Before a witness can be impeached by inquired into by the other, and when a
evidence that he has made at other times detached act, declaration, conversation,
statements inconsistent with his present writing or record is given in evidence, any
testimony, the statements must be related to other ct declaration, conversation, writing or
him, with the circumstances of the times and record necessary to its understanding may
places and the persons present, and he must also be given in evidence. (Sec. 17).
be asked whether he made such statements,
and if so, allowed to explain them. If the Q – GIVE THE RULE ON THE RIGHT TO INSPECT
statements be in writing they must be shown WRITING SHOWN TO WITNESS.
to the witness before any question is put to A – Whenever a writing is shown to witness, it may
him concerning them. (Sec. 13) be inspected by the adverse party. (Sec. 18)

Q – MAY EVIDENCE OF GOOD MORAL CHARACTER B. Authentication and Proof of Documents

OF AN ACCUSED BE PRESENTED?
A – As a rule, no. Evidence of the good character Q – DEFINE AND CLASSIFY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
of a witness is not admissible until such A – Documentary evidence refers to any tangible
character has been impeached. (Sec. 14) object capable of expressing a fact, or which
tend to establish the truth or untruth of matters
Q – STATE THE RULES ON THE EXCLUSION AND at issue, and includes all kinds of documents,
SEPARATION OF WITNESSES: records and writings. (Nuevas, Ibid., p 614
A – On any trial or hearing, the judge may exclude citing Curtis vs. Bradley, 65 Conn 99) It may
from the court any witness not at the time be classified into public and private
under examination sot that he may not hear documents. (Sec. 19).
the testimony of other witnesses. The judge
any also cause witnesses to be kept separate Q –WHAT ARE PUBLIC DOCUMENTS? PRIVATE
and to be prevented from conversing with DOCUMENTS?
one another until all shall have been A – Public documents are:
examined. (Sec. 15) a) The written official acts, or records of
official acts of the sovereign authority,
official bodies and tribunals, and public
Q – WHEN MAY A WITNESS REFER TO A MEMORADUM officers whether of the Philippines, or of a
AND STATE THE PROCEDURE? foreign country.
 b) Documents acknowledged before a
notary public except last wills and Q – HOW MAY AN OFFICIAL RECORD BE PROVED?
testaments; and A – The record of public documents referred to in
c) Public records, kept in the Philippines, of paragraph (a) of Section 19, when admissible
private documents required by law to be for any purpose may be evidenced by an
entered therein. official publication thereof of by a coyp
attested by the officer having the legal
Q – WHAT IS THE PRE-REQUISITE FOR THE custody of the record or by his deputy and
ADMISSIBILITY OF A PRIVATE DOCUMENT? accompanied if the record is not kept in the
A – It must be authenticated, which means that its Philippines, with a certificate that such officer
due execution and authenticity must first be has the custody. If the office in which the
proved. (Sec. 20) record is kept is in a foreign country, the
certificate may be made by a secretary of
Q – HOW MAY A PRIVATE DOCUMENT BE the embassy or legation , consul general,
AUTHENTICATED? consul, vice consul, or consular agent or by
A – In any of the following modes: any officer in the foreign service of
a) By anyone who saw the document thePhilippines stationed in the foreign country
executed or written; or in which the record is kept and authenticated
b) By evidence of the genuineness of the by the seal of his office (Sec. 24)
signature or handwriting of the maker.
(Sec. 20) Q – WHEN A COPY OF A WRITING IS ATTESTED FOR
THE PURPOSE OF EVIDENCE, WHAT MUST THE
Q – WHAT IS AN ANCIENT DOCUMENT? ATTESTATION STATE?
A – A document is ancient if the following requisites A – Whenever a copy of a document or record is
concur: attested for the purpose of evidence, the
a) The document is more than thirty years attestation must state, insubstance, that the
old; copy is a correct copy of the original, or a
b) It is produced from a custody in which it specific part thereof, as the case may be.
would naturally be found if genuine; and The attestation must be under the official seal
c) It is unblemished by any alterations or of the attesting officer, if there be any, or if he
circumstances of suspicioin.(Sec. 21). be theclerk of a court having a seal, under
the seal of such court. (Sec. 25)
Q – HOW MAY THE HANDWRITING OF A PERSON
PROVED? Q – WHAT IS MEANT BY IRREMOVABILITY OF PUBLIC
A – The handwriting of a person may be proved by RECORD?
any witness who believes it to be the A – It means that any public record an official copy
handwriting of such person because he ahs of which is admissible in evidence, must not
seen the person write or has seen writing be removed from the office in which it is kept
purporting to be his upon which the witness except upon order of a court where the
has acted or ben charged, and has thus inspection of the record is essential to the just
acquired knowledge of the handwriting of determination of a pending case. (Sec. 26)
such person. Evidence respecting the
handwriting may also be given by a Q – HOW MAY THE AUTHORIZED PUBLIC RECORD OF
comparison, made by the witness or the A PRIVATE DOCUMENT BE PROVED?
court, with writings admitted or treated as A – An authorized public record of a private
genuine by the party against whom the document may be proved.
evidence is offered, or proved to be genuine a) By the original record; or
to the satisfaction of the judge. (Sec. 22) b) By a coy thereof, attested by the legal
custodian of the record, with an
Q – WHAT DOES A PUBLIC DOCUMENT PROVE? appropriate certificate that such officer
A – Document consisting of entries in public records has the custody. (Sec. 27)
made in the performance of a duty by a
public officer are prima facie evidence of the Q – GIVE THE RULE ON PROOF OF LACK OF RECORD.
facts therein stated. All other public A – A written statement signed by an officer having
documents are evidence, even against a the custody of an official record or by his
third person, of the fact which gave rise to deputy that after diligent search no record or
their execution and of the date of the latter. entry of a specified tenor is found to exist in
(Sec. 23) the records of his office, accompanied by a
 certificate as above provided, is admissible as C. Offer and Objection
evidence that the records of his office contain
no such records or entry. (Sec. 28).
Q – WHAT IS THE REASON AND PURPOSE FOR THE
Q – HOW MAY A JUDICIAL RECORD BE IMPEACHED? OFFER OF EVIDENCE?
A – Any judicial record may be impeached be A – The court shall consider no evidence which has
impeached by evidence of: not been formally offered. The purposes for
a) want of jurisdiction in the court or judicial which the evidence is offered must be
officer; specified. (Sec. 34)
b) collusion between the parties or
c) fraud in the party offering the record, in Q – WHEN SHALL OFFER OF EVIDENCE BE MADE?
respect to the proceedings. A – As regards the testimony of a witness, the offer
(Sec. 29) must be made at the time the witness is called
to testify.
Q – STATE THE RULE ON PROOF OF NOTARIAL
DOCUMENTS. Documentary and object evidence shall be
A – Every instrument duly acknowledged or proved offered after the presentation of a party’s
an certified as provided by law, may be testimonial evidence. Such offer shall be
presented in evidence without further proof done orally unless allowed by the court to be
the certificate of acknowledgement being done in writing. (Sec. 35)
prima facie evidence of the execution of the
instrument of document involved. (Sec. 30) Q – WHEN SHALL OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE OFFERED
BE MADE?
A – Objection to evidence offered orally must be
Q – HOW MAY THE ALTERATIONS IN A DOCUMENT BE made immediately after the offer is made.
EXPLAINED BY THE PARTY PRODUCING IT?
A – The party producing a document as genuine Objection to a question propounded in the
which has been altered and appears to have coursed of the oral examination of a witness
been altered after its execution, in a part shall be made as soon as the grounds
material to the question in dispute, must therefore shall become reasonably apparent.
account for the alteration. He may show that
the alteration was made by another without An offer of evidence in writing shall be
his concurrence, or was made with the objected to within three(3) days after notice
consent of the parties affected by it or was of the offer unless a different period is allowed
otherwise properly or innocently made, or that by the court.
the alteration did not change the meaning or
language of the instrument. If he fails to do In any case, the grounds for the objections
that, the document shall not be admissible in must be specified. (Sec.
evidence. (Sec. 31) 36)

Q – WHEN IS OBJECTION TO EVIDENCE

Q –GIVE THE RULE ON SEALED AND UNSEALED UNNECESSARY?
PRIVATE DOCUMENTS. A – When it becomes reasonably apparent in the
A – There shall be no difference between sealed course of the examination of a witness that
and unsealed private documents insofar as the questions being propounded are of the
their admissibility as evidence is concerned. same class as those to which objection has
(Sec. 32). been made, whether such objection was
sustained or overruled, it shall not be
Q – WHEN MAY DOCUMENTS WRITTEN IN UNOFFICIAL necessary to repeat the objection, it being
LANGUAGE BE ADMISSIBLE? sufficient for the adverse party to record his
A – Documents written in an unofficial language continuing objection to such class of
shall not be admitted as evidence, unless questions. (Sec. 37)
accompanied with a translation into English or
Filipino. To avoid interruption of proceedings, Q – DISTINGUISH BETWEEN A GENERAL AND SPECIFIC
parties or their attorneys are directed to have OBJECTION.
such translation prepared before trial. (Sec. A – An objection is general when the grounds
33) thereof are not stated, or are generally
stated. An objection that the evidence
 offered is irrelevant, incompetent, or Q – STATE THE PROCEDURE IF THE COURT EXCLUDES
inadmissible is a general one. (Moran, DOCUMENTS OR THINGS OFFERED IN
Remedial Law Reviewer, p. 690 citing Rush vs. EVIDENCE.
French, 1 Ariz., 99, 25 Pac. 819) An objection is A – If documents or things offered in evidence are
specific where it states wherein or how or why excluded by the court, the offeror may have
the evidence is irrelevant or incompetent. the same attached to or made part of the
(Moran, Ibid., Rush vs. French, supra) The record. If the evidence excluded is oral, the
general rule is that an objection must be offeror may state for the record the name
specified(Sec. 36) and other personal circumstances of the
witness and the substance of the proposed
Q – WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF A GENERAL OBJECTION? testimony. (Sec. 40)
A – A general objection is sufficient, if on the face
of the evidence objected to units relation to
the rest of the case, there appears no RULE 133
purpose whatever for which it would have WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE
been admissible. Thus, it has been held that
where there is a general objection to Q – WHAT IS THE DEGREE OF PROOF IN CRIMINAL
evidence and it is overruled, and the CASES?
evidence is received, the ruling will not be A – In a criminal case, the accused is entitled to an
held erroneous unless the evidence, in its acquittal, unless his guilt is shown beyond
essential nature, is inadmissible. Where the reasonable doubt. (Sec. 2, Rule 133)
general objection is sustained, and the
evidence excluded, the ruling will not be Q – WHAT IS PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT?
upheld, unless any ground in fact existed for A – Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean
the exclusion (6 Moran, Comments, p. 128, such a degree of proof as, excluding
1963 ed.) possibility of error, produces absolute
certainty. Moral certainty only is required, or
Q – WHENSHALL THE COURT RULE ON THE that degree of proof which produces
OBJECTIONS TO THE OFFER OF EVIDENCE? conviction in uprejudiced mind. (Sec. 2)
A – The ruling of the court must be given
immediately after the objection is made, Q – WHAT DEGREE OF PROOF IS NECESSARY FOR
unless the court desires to take a reasonable CONVICTION IN CRIMINAL CASES?
time to inform itself on the question presented A – A defendant in a criminal action shall be
by the ruling (Sec. 38) presumed to be innocent until the contrary is
proved, and in case of reasonable doubt that
Q – SHOULD THE COURT STATE THE REASON FOR ITS his guilt is satisfactorily shown, he shall be
RULING IN CASE OF OBJECTION TO EVIDENCE? entitle to an acquittal. (People vs. Bequino,
A – The reason for sustaining or overruling an 77 Phil. 629) Therefore, the guilt of the
objection need not be stated. However, if the accused must be established by the
objection is based on two or more grounds, a prosecution by proof beyond reasonable
ruling sustaining the objection on one or some doubt.
of them must specify the ground or grounds
relied upon. (Sec. 38) Q – WHAT ARE THE FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED ON
THE WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY OF TESTIMONIAL
Q – WHEN MAY THE COURT STRIKE OUT AN ANSWER EVIDENCE?
OF A WITNESS DURING THE TRIAL? A – In determining where the superior weight of
A – Should a witness answer the question before evidence on the issues involved lies the court
the adverse party had the opportunity to may consider all the facts and circumstances
voice fully its objection to the same, and such of the case including the following:
objection is found to be meritorious, the court a) the witness’ manner of testifying;
shall sustain the objection and order the b) the intelligence of the witnesses, their
answer given to be striken off the record. means and opportunity of knowing the
facts to which they are testifying;
On proper motion, the court may also order c) the nature of the facts to which the
the striking out of answers which are witnesses testify;
incompetent, irrelevant or otherwise improper. d) the probability or improbability of the
(Sec. 39) testimony of witnesses;
 e) the interest or want of interest of the Q – WHEN MAY THE COURT STOP THE PRESENTATION
witnesses; OF FURTHER EVIDENCE?
f) the personal credibility of the witnesses so A – The court may stop the introduction of further
far as the same may legitimately appear testimony upon any particular point when the
upon the trial, and evidence upon it is already so full that more
g) the number of witnesses. (U.S. vs. Lasada, witnesses to the same point cannot be
18 Phil. 90) reasonably expected to be additionally
persuasive. But this power should be
exercised with caution. (Sec. 6)
Q – WHEN IS THE EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION OF AN
ACCUSED SUFFICIENT TO CONVICT? Q – GIVE THE RULE ON THE EVIDENCE ON MOTION.
A – An extrajudicial confession made by an A – When a motion is based on facts not
accused, shall not be sufficient ground fro appearing of record the court may hear the
conviction, unless corroborated by evidence matter on affidavits or depositions presented
of corpus delicti. (Sec. 3) by the respective parties, but the court may
direct that the matter be heard wholly or
Q – WHAT IS THE CORPUS DELICTI? partly on oral testimony or depositions. (Sec. 7)
A – It is the fact of specific loss or injury. In
homicide, the fact of death, whether or not RULE 134
feloniously caused is the corpus delicti (Cortez PERPETUATION OF TESTIMONY
vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-32246, June 2,
1988) Q – HOW MAY A PERSON PERPETUATE HIS OWN
TESTIMONY?
Q – WHAT MANNER OF PROOF IS REQUIRED IN SELF- A – A person who desires to perpetuate his own
DEFENSE? testimony or that of another person regarding
A – Accused who claims self-defense has the any matter that may be cognizable in any
burden to prove its elements by clear and court of the Philippines, may file a verified
convincing evidence. That evidence must be petition in the court of the province of the
clear, satisfactory and convincing. (People residence of any expected adverse party
vs. Macariola, 120 SCRA 92) (Sec. 1)

Q – WHEN IS CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT Q – WHAT SHALL BE ALLEGED IN THE PETITION?

FOR CONVICTION? A – The petition shall be entitled in the name of the
A – Circumstantial evidence is sufficient for petitioner and shall show (a) that the
conviction if; petitioner expects to be a party to an action
a) There is more than one circumstance; in a court of the Philippines but is presently
b) The facts from which the inferences are unable to bring it or cause it to be brought;
derived are proven; and (b) the subject matter of the expected action
c) The combination of all the circumstances is and his interest therein; (c) the facts which is
such as to produce a conviction beyond he desires to establish by the proposed
reasonable doubt. (Sec. 4) testimony and his reasons for desiring to
perpetuate it; (d) the names or a description
Q – GIVE THE RULE ON SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. of the persons he expects will be adverse
A – In cases filed before administrative or quasi- parties and their addresses so far as known;
judicial bodies, a fact may be deemed and (e) the names and addresses of the
established if it is supported by substantial persons to be examined and the substance of
evidence, or that amount of relevant the testimony which he expects to elicit from
evidence which a reasonable mind might each, and shall ask for an order authorizing
accept as adequate to justify a conclusion. the petitioner to take the depositions of the
(Sec. 5) persons to be examined named in the petition
for the purpose of perpetuating their
Q – WHAT IS SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE? testimony. (Sec. 2)
A – Substantial evidence has been defined to be
such relevant evidenced as a reasonable
mind might accept as adequate to support a Q – WHAT SHALL THE NOTICE OF PETITION CONTAIN,
conclusion. (Berenguer, Jr. vs. Court of AND UPON WHOM, WHEN AND HOW SHALL IT
Appeals, G.R. No. L-60287, Aug. 17, 1988) BE SERVED?
A – The petitioner shall thereafter serve a notice Q – WHAT SHALL THE MOTION SHOW?
upon each person named in the petition as A – The motion shall show (a) the names and
an expected adverse party, together with a addresses of the persons to be examined and
copy of the petition, stating that the petitioner the substance of the testimony which he
will apply to the court, at a time and place expects to elicit from each; and (b) the
named therein, for the order described in the reason for perpetuating their testimony. (Sec.
petition. At least twenty (20) days before the 7)
date of hearing the notice shall be served in
the manner provided for service of summons. Q – WHAT SHALL BE ORDERED BY THE COURT?
(Sec. 3) A – If the court finds that the perpetuation of the
testimony is proper to avoid a failure or delay
Q – WHAT SHALL THE COURT DO IF IT IS SATISFIED of justice, it may make an order allowing is
THAT THE PERPETUATION OF TESTIMONY MAY proper to avoid a failure or delay of justice, it
PREVENT A FAILURE OR DELAY OF JUSTICE? may make an order allowing the depositions
A – If the court is satisfied that the perpetuation of to be taken, and thereupon the depositions
the testimony may prevent a failure or delay may be taken and used in the same manner
of justice, it shall make an order designating or and under the same conditions as are
describing the persons whose deposition may prescribed in these rules for depositions taken
be taken and specifying the subject matter of in actions pending in the Regional Trial Court.
the examination, and whether the deposition (Sec. 7)
shall be taken upon oral examination or
written interrogatories. The depositions may
then be taken in accordance with Rule 24
before the hearing (Sec. 4)

For the purpose of applying Rule 24 to

depositions for perpetuating testimony, each
reference therein to the court in which the
action is pending shall be deemed to refer to
the court in which the petition for such
deposition was filed. (Sec. 5)

Q – GIVE THE RULE ON THE USE OF DEPOSITION.

A – If a deposition to perpetuate testimony is taken
under this rule, or if, although not so taken, it
would be admissible in evidence, it may be
used in any action involving the same subject
matter subsequently brought in accordance
with the provision of Sections 4 and 5 of Rule
24. (Sec. 6)

Q – IN SUCH A CASE, HOW AND WHERE SHALL THE

PETITION BE FILED?
A – If an appeal has been taken from a judgment
of the Regional Trial Court or before the taking
of an appeal if the time therefore has not
expired, the Regional Trial Court in which the
judgment was rendered may allow the taking
of depositions of witnesses to perpetuate their
testimony for use in the event of further
proceedings in the said court. In such case
the party who desires to perpetuate the
testimony may make a motion in the said
Regional Trial Court for leave to take the
depositions, upon the same notice and
service thereof as if the action was pending
therein. (Sec. 7)