INNOVATIVE COLLEGE OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

Malitbog, Bongabong, Oriental Mindoro

CRIMINOLOGY DEPARTMENT

EVIDENCE
ATTY. PRINCESS JANINE R. SY

I. OBJECTIVES
1. To discuss and explain Admission and Confession
2. To distinguish Admission and Confession.
3. To discuss Res Inter Alios Acta Rule and its exceptions.

II. TIME FRAME

Week 10 October 9-14, 2023

III. DISCUSSION

ADMISSIONS AND CONFESSIONS

What is an admission?
An admission is an act, declaration or omission of a party as to a relevant fact which may
be given in evidence against him or her (ROC. Rule 130. Sec. 27). It is a voluntary
acknowledgment made by a party of the existence of the truth of certain facts which are
inconsistent with his claims in an action (Black's Law Dictionary, 5" Ed., p. 44).

ACT
- Flight from the scene of a crime
- Changing one’s appearance or name
- Transfer of property

Distinguish Admission from Confession

a. Admission merely a statement of fact not directly involving an acknowledgment of guilt or

of the criminal intent to commit the offense with which one is charged, while in Confession,
there is an acknowledgment of guilt.
b. As to Scope - Admission includes confession, the former being broader term because
accordingly, a confession is also an admission. On the other hand, a Confession is a specific
type of admission which refers only to an acknowledgement of guilt.
c. As to manner- Admission can be express or implied, while Confession must always be
express.
d. In a criminal case- Admission is a statement by the accused, direct or implied, of facts
pertinent to the issue, and tending, in connection with proof of other facts, to prove his guilt.
While Confession is an acknowledgement in express terms, by a party in a criminal case, of
his guilt of the crime charged.

What is the res inter alios acta alteri nocere non debet rule?
This rule provides that the rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or
omission of another (People v. Cachuela, G.R. No. 191752, June 10, 2013).

What are the two branches of the res inter alios acta rule?
The two branches are the following:

1. The rule that the rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act. declaration, or
omission of another (ROC, Rule 130, Sec. 29); and

| Sy, Princess Janine R. Page 1 of 5

 2. The rule that evidence of previous conduct or similar acts at one time is not admissible
to prove that one did or did not do the same act at another time (ROC. Rule 132, Sec. 35).

What are the exceptions to the res inter alios acta rule?

The exceptions are the following:

1. Admissions by a co-partner or agent, joint owner, joint debtor, and persons

jointly interested (RROE, Rule 130, Sec. 30);
2. Admission by conspirator (RROE, Rule 130, Sec. 31);
3. Admission by privies: (ROC, Rule 130, Sec. 32); and 234
4. Admission by silence (ROC, Rule 130, Sec. 33).

What are the requisites of an admission by a co-partner or agent?

For this admission to apply, the following requisites must concur:

1. There is an act or declaration of a partner or agent;
2. The partner or agent is authorized by the party to make a statement concerning the
subject, or within the scope of his or her authority:
3. The act or declaration is made during the existence of the partnership or agency; and
4. The partnership or agency is shown by evidence other than such act or declaration.

Illustration
A customer slipped, supervisor statement “ anak ng tinapa, ang dami mong nilagay na
floor wax”.
What are the requisites of admission by a co-conspirator?

For the admission of a conspirator to be received against his co-conspirators, it is necessary that:

1. The declaration or act must be in furtherance of the conspiracy;

2. During the existence of the conspiracy; and
3. The conspiracy is shown by evidence other than such act or declaration (RROE, Rule
130, Sec. 31).

Illustration:
A, B and C conspired to commit a crime “robbery”
- The admission of A that they conspired – binding against him, can be used against
him
- Not binding against B and C- res inter alios acta

A statement made in furtherance of a conspiracy is one intended to advance the objectives of

the conspiracy.

Example:
Illegal gun-dealer testified that A told him he wanted to buy a suitable gun which he was
going to use in a bank robbery planned by him and B and C.
However a statement by a co-conspirator merely bragging to the witness about the
conspiracy is not “in furtherance thereo.
A is courting Z. A told Z that he together with B and C will rob a bank and they will earn
a lot of money.

Hazing law
- If you are present in a hazing, prima facie evidence that you participated.
- Exception to res inter alios acta

| Sy, Princess Janine R. Page 2 of 5

 What are the requisites of admission by privies?
Privy: Per the rules a person from whom one derives the title to property from. E.g.
donor, vendor, decedent, testator.
The requisites are:
1. There is an act, declaration or omission by a predecessor-in-interest:
2. The act, declaration, or omission of the predecessor-in-interest occurred while he was
holding the title to the property; and
3. The act, declaration or omission must be in relation to the property (ROC, Rule 130,
Sec. 32)
Illustration
A>B>C C is suing B
Fake jewelry
W: he heard A said that “ the jewelry was fake”

What are the requisites of admission by silence? (K-DRUM)

Before the silence of a party may be taken as an admission of what is said, it must appear that:
1. He heard and Understood the statement;
2. He was at liberty to interpose a Denial;
3. The statement was in respect to some matter affecting his Rights or in which he was
then interested, and calling, naturally, for an answer:
4. The facts were within his Knowledge; and
5. The fact admitted or the inference to be drawn from his silence would be Material to
the issue (People v. Paragsa, G.R. No. L-44060, July 20, 1978).

Illustration:
Accused’s silence when his wife’s nephew asked him why he killed his wife is an
admission by silence under S33 R130

CONFESSION
What is the test for an extrajudicial confession, not made during custodial investigation, to
be admissible against the accused?
The basic test for the validity of a confession is - was it voluntarily and freely made.
The term "voluntary" means that the accused speaks of his free will and accord, without
inducement of any kind, and with a full and complete knowledge of the nature and consequences
of the confession, and when the speaking is so free from influences affecting the will of the
accused, at the time the confession was made, that it renders it admissible in evidence against
him (People v. Satorre. G.R. No. 133858. August 12. 2003).

What is the required form for an extrajudicial confession, not made during custodial
investigation, to be admissible against the accused?
A confession is not required to be in any particular form. It may be oral or written,
formal or informal in character. It may be recorded on video tape, sound motion pictures, or
tape. However, while not required to be in writing to be admissible in evidence, it is advisable, if
not otherwise recorded by video tape or other means, to reduce the confession to writing. This
adds weight to the confession and helps convince the court that it was freely and voluntarily
made (People v. Satorre, G.R. No. 133858, August 12,

State the requisites for an extrajudicial confession during custodial investigation to be

admissible against the accused. (CEVI)

In order that an admission of guilt of an accused during custodial investigation be admitted in

evidence, the following requisites must be present:

1. The facts admitted must be constitutive of a Criminal offense;

2. The confession must involve an Express and categorical acknowledgment of guilt;

| Sy, Princess Janine R. Page 3 of 5

 3. The confession must have been given Voluntarily; and
4. The confession must have been Intelligently made by the accused while realizing the
importance or legal significance of his act (People v. Matignas, G.R. No. 126146, March
12, 2002)

Will an extrajudicial confession, by itself, sustain a conviction?

No. An extrajudicial confession made by an accused shall not be sufficient ground for
conviction, unless corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti (ROC, Rule 133, Sec. 3).

May evidence of similar acts or previous conduct be admissible as evidence?

As a general rule, no. Evidence that one did or did not do a certain thing at one time
is not admissible to prove that he did or did not do the same or similar thing at another
time (ROC, Rule 130, Sec 35). It is a well-settled rule that evidence is not admissible which
shows or tends to show that the accused in a criminal case has committed a crime wholly
independent from the offense for which he is on trial. (People v. Galo, G.R. Nos. 70306-07, July
30, 1986).

What are the instances that can be proven by similar acts or previous conduct? (SKIPS-
SCHUL)

Similar acts or previous conduct may be received to prove:

1. Specific intent;
2. Knowledge;
3. Identity:
4. Plan;
5. System;
6. Scheme:
7. Custom;
8. Habit; or
9. Usage; and
10. The Like (ROC, Rule 130, Sec. 35).

COMPROMISE

In civil cases, is an offer of compromise tantamount to an admission of liability?

No. In civil cases, an offer of compromise is not an admission of any liability, and is not
admissible in evidence against the offeror (RROE, Rule 130, Sec. 28).

In civil cases, is evidence of conduct and statements made in compromise negotiations

admissible as an admission of liability?
No. Neither is evidence of conduct nor statements made in compromise negotiations
admissible, except evidence otherwise discoverable or offered for another purpose, such as
proving bias or prejudice of a witness, negativing a contention of undue delay, or proving and
effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or prosecution (RROE, Rule 130, Sec. 28).

In criminal cases, when may an offer of compromise be received in evidence against the
accused?
In criminal cases, except those involving quasi-offenses or those allowed by law to be
compromised, an offer of compromise by the accused may be received in evidence as an implied
admission of guilt (RROE, Rule 130, Sec. 28).

Note: No one would ask for forgiveness unless he has committed a wrong and a plea for
forgiveness may be considered analogous to an attempt to compromise (People v. Dela Cruz,
G.R. No. 177572, February 26, 2008).

What is the effect if the accused makes a plea of guilty, but withdraws it, or an offer of a
plea of guilty to a lesser offense, but was not accepted?

| Sy, Princess Janine R. Page 4 of 5

 A plea of guilty later withdrawn or an unaccepted offer of a plea of guilty to a lesser offense
is not admissible in evidence against the accused who made the plea or offer (RROE, Rule
130, Sec. 28).

What is the effect of the offer of compromise was made by an unauthorized person?
The rule is that for a compromise to amount to an implied admission of guilt, the
accusad should have been present or at least authorized the proposed compromise.
Moreover, it has been held that where the accused was not present at the time the offer for
monetary consideration was made, such offer of compromise would not save the day for the
prosecution (People v. Erguiza, G.R. No. 171348, November 26, 2008).

What is a Good Samaritan Rule?

Under this Rule, an offer to pay, or the payment of medical, hospital or other expenses
occasioned by an injury, is not admissible in evidence as proof of civil or criminal liability for
the injury.

IV. Comprehensive check – up

1. What is the difference between admission and confession?

2. What is Res Inter Alios Acta?
3. What are the Exceptions under Res Inter Alios Acta Rule?
4. Can a compromise in a criminal case be used against the offeror? How?

Checked by:

Mrs. Melody Comia- Dimapilis

Department Head

| Sy, Princess Janine R. Page 5 of 5