lOMoARcPSD|23552236

notes in criminal evidence

Criminology (Isabela State University)

Scan to open on Studocu

Studocu is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university

Downloaded by Kayla Kenn Arroyo ([email protected])
 lOMoARcPSD|23552236

Subject: Rules on Evidence

1
Terms to know:
RULES ON EVIDENCE
a. Irrelevant evidence - offered piece of evidence has
no probative value
EVIDENCE - It is the means, sanctioned by the Rules of b. Inadmissible evidence - offered evidence is
Court, of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the truth excluded by some rule of evidence
respecting a matter of fact. c. Incompetent evidence - offered evidence is not
qualified under the rules of testimonial evidence
Basis of the rule of evidence: the adoption to the d. Immaterial evidence – the offered evidential fact is
successful development of the truth; and a rule of evidence directed to prove some probandum which is not
at one time though necessary to the ascertainment of truth proper in issue. The rule of substantive law and of
should yield to the experience of a succeeding generation pleading are what determines immateriality
whenever that experience has clearly demonstrated the e. Conditional Admissibility – evidence is admissible
fallacy or unwisdom of the old rule. only in dependence upon other facts. It is received
on the express assurance of counsel, when
Evidence Distinguished from Proof: Evidence is the objection is manifested, that other facts will be duly
means of proof; effect of evidence, the established fact of presented at a suitable opportunity before the case
evidence is closed.
f. Multiple Admissibility - When a fact is offered for
one purpose, and is admissible in so far as it
Classifications: satisfies all rules applicable to it when offered for
that purpose, its failure to satisfy some other rule
1. OBJECT – Directly addressed to the senses of the which would be applicable to it offered for another
court [Rule 130, Sec. 1]. Referred to as real evidence purpose does not exclude it.
or evidence by “autoptic preference”.
2. DOCUMENTARY – Consist of writing or any material
containing modes of written expression (i.e. words, INSTANCES WHEN PROOF CAN BE DISPENSED WITH
numbers, figures, symbols) offered as proof of their 1. Res ipsa loquitur
contents.[Rule 130, Sec. 2] 2. Presumptions
3. TESTIMONIAL – Submitted to the court through the 3. Judicial notice
testimony or deposition of a witness. 4. Judicial admissions

Other Classifications: Kinds of presumptions:

1. DIRECT – Proves the fact in dispute without aid of any 1. Conclusive - which the law does not allow to be
inference or presumption. controverted
2. CIRCUMSTANTIAL – Proof of fact/s from which, 2. Disputable - which are satisfactory if uncontradicted,
taken singly/collectively, the existence of the particular but which may be contradicted and overcome by other
fact in dispute may be inferred as a evidence
necessary/probable consequence. It is evidence of
relevant collateral facts. JUDICIAL NOTICE – cognizance of certain facts by the court
w/o proof because they are facts, which, by common
3. CUMULATIVE – Evidence of the same kind and to the experience, are of universal knowledge among intelligent
same state of facts. persons w/in a country or community
4. CORROBORATIVE – Additional evidence of a
different character to the same point. Requisites:
5. PRIMA FACIE – That which, standing alone is 1. matter of common knowledge
sufficient to maintain the proposition affirmed. 2. well & authoritatively settled and not doubted or
uncertain
3. known to be w/in the limits of jurisdiction of the court
6. CONCLUSIVE – That class of evidence which the law
does not allow to be contradicted. Judicial Admission – admission, verbal or written, made by
a party in the course of the proceedings in the same case;
7. PRIMARY – (Best evidence) The law regards these as does not require proof.
affording the greatest certainty of the fact in question.
8. SECONDARY – (Substitutionary evidence) Permitted RULES OF ADMISSIBILITY
by law only when the best evidence is unavailable.
OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE – that which is addressed
9. POSITIVE – When a witness affirms that a fact did or directly to the sense of the court without the intervention of a
did not occur (there is personal knowledge). witness, as by actual sight, hearing, taste, smell or touch.
10. NEGATIVE – When witness states that he did not see A.K.A autopticproference.
or know of the occurrence of a fact
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE – documents as evidence
consist of writings or any material containing letters, words,
EVIDENCE COMPARED numbers, figures, symbols or other modes of written
expressions offered as proof of their contents
 PROOF – It is the result or effect of evidence; when the
requisite quantum of evidence of a particular fact has “The Best Evidence Rule”: The original document must be
been duly admitted and given weight, the result is called produced.
the proof of such fact.
 FACTUM PROBANDUM – The ultimate fact or the fact Application of the Rule: Only if the contents or terms of the
sought to be established. It refers to the proposition (e.g. writing or documents is directly in issue.
victim was stabbed).
 FACTUM PROBANS – The evidentiary fact or the fact Example: Libel case, the news paper itself should be
by which the factum probandum is to be established; produced. Falsification case, the document allegedly falsified
refers to the materials that establish the proposition (e.g. must be produced in court
bloody knife).
Exception of the Rule: Secondary evidence can be
presented in lieu of the original in the following cases:

Downloaded by Kayla Kenn Arroyo ([email protected])

 lOMoARcPSD|23552236

Subject: Rules on Evidence

2
CLASSES OF DOCUMENTS:
Original of a document
a. the contents of which are the subject of the inquiry 1. PUBLIC, consisting of:
b. when a document is in two or more copies executed  the written official acts, or records of the official acts
at or about the same time with identical contents of the sovereign authority, official bodies and
c. when an entry is repeated in the regular course of tribunals, and public officers, whether of the
the business Philippines, or of a foreign country;
 Documents acknowledged before a notary public,
Exceptions to the rule that only original documents may except last wills and testaments; and
be admissible:
a. when the original has been lost or destroyed Note: Notarial documents may be presented in evidence
b. when the original is in the custody or control of the without further proof. The certificate of acknowledgement
party against whom it is offered, and the latter fails is prima facie evidence of the execution of the
to produce it instrument or document involved.
c. when the original is a public record in the custody of
a public officer or is recorded in a public office  Public records, kept in the Philippines, of private
d. when the original consists of numerous accounts or documents required by law to be entered therein.
cannot be examined by the court without great loss
of time Note: These documents may be proved by: (a) the
original record, or (b) a copy thereof attested by the legal
BEST EVIDENCE RULE custodian of the record, with an appropriate certificate
a. only original of the document is admissible. that such officer has the custody.
b. Merely assures presentation of the original
document and bars non-original documents, etc.. 2. PRIVATE, consisting of all other writings.
BUT not evidence aliunde or parol evidence
c. Refers only to the factum probandum but not to the Note: Before any private document offered as authentic
interpretation of the document. is received in evidence, its due execution and
d. Original must be presented first before evidence authenticity must be proved either by:
aliunde may be presented  Anyone who saw the document executed or written;
or
SECONDARY EVIDENCE – that which shows that better or  Evidence of the genuineness of the signature or
primary evidence exists as to the proof of the fact in question. handwriting of the maker.
It is that class of evidence which is relevant to the fact in
issue, it being first shown that the primary evidence of Any other private document need only be identified
the fact is not obtainable as that which it is claimed to be.

When Secondary Evidence is Admissible A judicial record may be impeached by evidence of:
a. original has been lost or destroyed a. Want of jurisdiction in the court or judicial
b. prove the existence or execution of the original officer;
c. prove the cause of the unavailability of the original, b. Collusion between the parties; or
is not due to the bad faith of the offeror. c. Fraud in the party offering the record, in respect
to the proceedings
Documents that do not need to be authenticated:
PAROL EVIDENCE RULE (ORAL) – Forbids any addition to a. Public documents;
or contradiction of the terms of a written instrument by b. Notarial documents;
testimony purporting to show that, at or before the signing, of c. Ancient documents
the document, other or different terms were orally agreed
upon by the parties Ancient Document Rule - Where a private document is:
a. more than 30 years old,
Exceptions to the Parol Evidence Rule (must be alleged in b. is produced from a custody in which it would
the pleadings) [F-I-V-E] naturally be found if genuine, and
a. Failure of the written agreement to express the true c. is unblemished by any alterations or
intent & agreement of the parties circumstances of suspicion
b. Intrinsic ambiguity d. no other evidence of its authenticity need be
c. Validity of the written agreement given. (Rule 132, Sec. 21)
d. Existence of other terms agreed to by the parties
In what Instances must alterations in documents be
To justify the reformation of a written instrument upon accounted for by the producing party?
the ground of mistake, the concurrence of three things is a. The document being produced as genuine has
necessary: been altered;
b. The alteration appears to have been done after
a. mistake should be one of fact the execution of the document;
b. mistake should be mutual or common to both c. The alteration appears to have been in a part
parties to the instrument material to the question in dispute.
c. mistake should be alleged and proved by clear and
convincing evidence What explanations are satisfactory so as to make the
altered document admissible in evidence?
The producing party must show that the alteration was:
a. made by another;
Two kinds of ambiguities: b. made without his (the producing party’s)
a. patent (extrinsic) where the instrument on its face is concurrence;
unintelligible c. made with the consent of the parties affected by
b. latent (intrinsic) where the words of the instrument it;
are clear but their application to the circumstances d. otherwise properly or innocently made; or
is doubtful e. such that it did not change the meaning or
N.B.: the rule permits parol evidence to explain an language of the instrument.
intrinsic ambiguity

INTERPRETATION OF DOCUMENTS:

Downloaded by Kayla Kenn Arroyo ([email protected])

 lOMoARcPSD|23552236

Subject: Rules on Evidence

3
 CONSTRUCTION is the process or the art of b. person against whom the privilege is claimed is one
determining the sense, real meaning, or proper duly authorized to practice medicine, surgery or
explanation of obscure or ambiguous terms or provisions obstetrics
in a statute, written instrument or oral agreement, or the c. such information was acquired while he was
application of such subject to the case in question attending to the patient in his professional capacity
d. the information was necessary to enable him to act
 INTERPRETATION is the art or process of discovering in that capacity, and if disclosed, shall blacken the
and expounding the meaning of a statute, will, contract reputation of the patient
or other written document 4. Priest and penitent
Requisites:
a. clergyman or priest and a penitent
Rules in the interpretation of documents: b. confession of a penitential character
1. legal meaning the writing bears in the place of its c. made to the priest in his professional character
execution; d. confession is sanctioned by the church to which the
2. all provisions must be given effect; priest or religious officer belongs
3. intention of the parties must be pursued;
4. a particular intent will control a general intent 5. Public officers
inconsistent with it; Requisites:
5. circumstances of execution may be shown; a. confidential communication
6. terms are presumed to have been used in their b. made to or obtained by a public officer
primary and general acceptation; but evidence is c. obtained in the exercise of his public function
admissible to show an otherwise peculiar d. disclosure of the communication would be
signification; detrimental to the public interest
7. written words control printed;
8. experts & interpreters can be used to explain 6. Parental and Filial privilege - No person may be
characters difficult to be deciphered or language not compelled to testify against his parents, other direct
understood by the court; ascendants, children, or other direct descendants.
9. when terms were intended in different senses, that Notes:
sense is to prevail against either party in which he  This provision does not apply to spouses.
supposed the other understood it;  This provision means that you may testify if you
10. when different constructions are otherwise equally want, but you may not be compelled to testify.
proper, the one most favorable to the party in whose  This provision is subject to the qualification in Sec.
favor the provision was made will be taken; 215 of the Family Code, i.e. a descendant may be
11. construction in favor of natural right; compelled to testify against parents and
12. instrument may be construed according to usage grandparents IF the testimony is indispensable in a
crime against the descendant or by one parent
TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE against the other.
GENERAL RULE: The following are not grounds for
disqualification:
1. Religious belief; ADMISSIONS AND CONFESSIONS
2. Political belief;
3. Interest in the outcome of the case; and ADMISSION - It is an act, declaration or omission as to a
4. Conviction of a crime relevant fact. It may be given by a party (in which case Rule
EXCEPTION: When provided for by law. 130, Sec. 26 will be applicable) or by a third-party.
1. Grounds for disqualification enumerated in the
Rules on Evidence: General Rule: Confessions of a defendant made to
2. Disqualification by reason of: witnesses are admissible against him, but are
3. Mental incapacity inadmissible against his co-defendant
4. Immaturity Exception:
5. Marriage  confessions on the stand
6. Death or insanity of adverse party  confessions not objected to
7. Privileged communication  adopted confession
 identical confession
 corroborated confession
PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATIONS  confession by conspirator (after conspiracy has
been shown & proven)
1. Marital Confidential communication
Requisites: Self-serving declaration - a declaration wherein:
a. spouses are legally married a. the testimony is favorable to the declarant;
b. privilege is claims with regard to a communication, b. it is made extrajudicially; and
oral or written, made during the marriage c. it is made in anticipation of litigation.
c. said communication was made confidentially
d. action or proceeding where the privilege is claimed Note: Self-serving declarations are not admissible.
is not by one against the other
Requisites for the admissibility of an admission:
2. Attorney-Client Privileged Communication a. must involve matters of fact and not of law;
Requisites: b. must be categorical and definite;
a. legal advice of any kind is sought c. must be knowingly and voluntarily made;
b. from a professional legal adviser in his capacity as d. must be adverse to the admitter’s interest
such
c. the communications relating to that purpose CONFESSION - It is the declaration of an accused
d. made in confidence acknowledging his guilt of the offense charged, or of any
e. by the client offense necessarily included therein.
f. are at his instance permanently protected
g. from disclosure by himself or by the legal adviser ADMISSION & CONFESSION DISTINGUISED
h. except that the protection may be waived
Admission Confession
3. Physicians and clients Definition Statement of fact which Declaration
Requisites: does not involve an acknowledging
a. civil case acknowledgement of one’s guilt of the

Downloaded by Kayla Kenn Arroyo ([email protected])

 lOMoARcPSD|23552236

Subject: Rules on Evidence

4
guilt or liability offense charged
Form May be express or tacit Must be express Civil cases:Not admission of liability; not admissible in
Made by Party or 3rd person Party himself evidence against offeror
Cases in Both criminal and civil Usually criminal Criminal cases: Admissible against accused as implied
which cases cases admission of guilt
applicable Exceptions:
 Quasi-offenses (criminal negligence)
Differentiate an admission and confession in criminal  Those offenses allowed by law to be
cases. compromised (e.g., Sec. 204, NIRC of 1977)

Admission Confession
Definition Statement by the Acknowledgme The following are not admissions of liability or guilt and
accused, direct or nt in express are therefore not admissible in evidence:
implied, of facts pertinent terms by a party a. Plea of guilty later withdrawn;
to the issue and tending, in a criminal b. Unaccepted offer of plea of guilty to a lesser
in connection with proof case of his guilt offense;
of other facts, to prove his of the crime c. Offer to pay or payment of medical, hospital or other
guilt charged expenses occasioned by an injury
Sufficienc Insufficient. Tends only to Sufficient
y to establish the ultimate fact RES INTER ALIOS ACTA RULE - the rights of a party
authorize of guilt. cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration or omission of
a another (i.e. a non-party), except in the following instances:
conviction
1. by partner, agent or other person jointly
interested with the party
Differentiate the effects of judicial and extrajudicial
Requisites:
confessions.
a. the partnership, agency or joint interest is
proven by evidence other than the act or
A judicial confessionis sufficient in itself to sustain a
declaration sought to be admitted
conviction, even in capital offenses. On the other hand,
b. the admission is within the scope of the
an extrajudicial confession is insufficient in itself to
partnership, agency or joint interest
sustain a conviction. It must be corroborated by
c. admission was made while the agency, p’ship
evidence of the corpus delicti
or joint interest was in existence
Requisites for the admissibility of extrajudicial
2. by conspirator
confessions?
Requisites:
a. conspiracy is first proved by evidence other
a. Must involve an express and categorical
than the admission itself
acknowledgment of guilt (US v. Corales);
b. admission relates to the common object
b. The facts admitted must be constitutive of a criminal
c. that it has been made while the declarant was
offense (US v. Flores);
engaged in carrying out the conspiracy
c. Must have been given voluntarily (People v.
Nishishima);
3. by privies
d. Must have been made intelligently (Bilaan v. Cusi)
Requisites:
e. Must have been made with the assistance of
a. Relation of privity between party and declarant;
competent and independent counsel (Art III, Sec.
b. Admission was made by the declarant as
12, 1987 Constitution)
predecessor-in-interest, while holding title to the
property;
Rules governing extrajudicial confessions:
c. The admission was in relation to said property.
GENERAL RULE: The extrajudicial confession of an
Requisites for admission by silence:
accused is binding only upon himself and is not
a. Hearing and understanding of the statement by
admissible against his co-accused.
the party;
b. Opportunity and necessity of denying the
EXCEPTIONS:
statements;
1. Interlocking confessions, i.e. extrajudicial
c. Statement must refer to a matter affecting his
confessions independently made without collusion
right;
which are identical with each other in their material
d. Facts were within the knowledge of the party;
respects and confirmatory of the other (People v.
e. Facts admitted or the inference to be drawn
Encipido);
from his silence would be material to the issue
2. If the co-accused impliedly acquiesced in or
(Regalado)
adopted said confession by not questioning its
truthfulness (People v. Orenciada);
HEARSAY EVIDENCE RULE - A witness can testify only to
3. Where the accused admitted the facts stated by the
those facts which he knows of his personal knowledge.
confessant after being apprised of such confession
(People v. Narciso);
Independently relevant statement - It is a statement
4. If the accused are charged as co-conspirators of the
whose probative value is independent of its truth or
crime which was confessed by one of the accused
falsity. The mere fact of its utterance is relevant,
and said confession is used only as corroborative
evidence (People v. Linde);
Two kinds of independently relevant statements:
5. Where the confession is used as circumstantial
1. Statements which are the very facts in issue;
evidence to show the probability of participation by
2. Statements which are circumstantial evidence of the
the co-conspirator (People v. Condemena);
facts in issue (Francisco)
6. Where the confessant testified for his co-defendant
(People v. Villanueva);
7. Where the co-conspirator’s extrajudicial confession
Reasons for Excluding Hearsay:
is corroborated by other evidence of record (People
1. irresponsibility of the original declarant
v. Paz)
2. depreciation of truth in the process of repetition
3. opportunities for fraud would open
Rules on offer of compromise

Downloaded by Kayla Kenn Arroyo ([email protected])

 lOMoARcPSD|23552236

Subject: Rules on Evidence

5
4. tendency of such evidence to protect legal inquiries, Res gestae is the startling Res gestae is the
and encourage the substitution of weaker for occurrence equivocal act
stronger proofs. Exclamation may be prior Verbal act must be
to, simultaneous with or contemporaneous with or
subsequent to the startling must accompany the
occurrence equivocal act
Exceptions to Hearsay Rule

1. Dying declaration 7. Entries in the course of business

Requisites: Requisites:
a. death is imminent a. entrant made the entries in his professional
b. declarant is conscious of his impending death capacity or in the performance of a duty
c. declaration refers to material facts which b. entrant is dead, outside of the Phils. or unable
concern the identity of the deceased or the to testify
accused, the cause & circumstances of the c. entries were made in the ordinary course of
killing business or duty
d. declarant would be competent to testify had he d. entries were made at or near the time of the
survived any case wherein the subject is his transaction to which it relates
death. e. entrant was in a position to know the facts
stated in the entry
f. there must be more than one entry
2. Declaration against interest
Requisites: 8. Entries in official records
a. declarant would not be available to testify Requisites:
(dead, mentally incapacitated incompetent a. entry was made by a public officer or by
etc..) another person specially enjoined by law to do
b. declaration must concern a fact cognizable by so
declarant b. made in the performance of his duties or by
c. circumstances must render it improbable that a another person in the performance of a duty
motive to falsify existed specially enjoined by law
c. the public officer or the other person had
3. Act or declaration against pedigree sufficient knowledge of the facts by him stated,
Requisites: acquired by him either personally or thru official
a. declarant is dead or unable to testify channels connected with the exercise of his
b. pedigree must be in issue public functions
c. declarant must be a relative of the person
whose pedigree is in question 9. Commercial lists and the like
d. declaration must be made before the 10. Learned treatises
controversy occurred – ante-litem motam 11. Testimony or deposition at a former proceeding
Requisites:
4. Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree a. testimony was rendered in a former case
Requisites: b. identity of parties
a. tradition or reputation is one existing in the c. identity of subject matter
family d. adverse party had opportunity to cross-examine
b. reputation or tradition was formed ante-litem the witness
motam e. witness is dead, outside of the Phils., pr unable
c. witness testifying to the reputation or tradition is to testify in the subsequent trial
a member of the family
THE OPINION RULE – The opinion of a witness is not
admissible, except in the following cases:
5. Common reputation
Requisites: 1. On a matter requiring special knowledge, skill,
a. that the matter to which the reputation refers to experience or training which he possesses, that is,
is of public or general interest and more than 30 when he is an expert thereon;
years old 2. Regarding the identity or the handwriting of a
b. that the reputation is one formed in the person, when he has knowledge of the person or
community interested handwriting, whether he is an ordinary or expert
c. it existed ante litem motam witness;
3. On the mental sanity of a person, if the witness is
6. Part of the res gestae sufficiently acquainted with the former or if the latter
a. spontaneous exclamations is an expert witness;
Requisites: 4. On the emotion, behavior, condition or appearance
 the principal fact, the res gestae, must be a of a person which he has observed; and
startling occurrence 5. On ordinary matters known to all men of common
 statements must have been made before perception, such as the value of ordinary household
the declarant had time to contrive or devise articles (Galian v. State Assurance Co., Ltd.)
 statements must concern the occurrence in
question and its immediately attending RULES ON CHARACTER EVIDENCE
circumstances
b. Contemporaneous statements or verbal acts GENERAL RULE: Not admissible.
Requisites:
 conduct characterized by the words must EXCEPTIONS:
be independently material to the issue 1. In criminal cases:
 conduct must be equivocal a. Accused may prove his good moral character
 words must aid in giving legal significance which is pertinent to the moral trait involved in
to the conduct the offense charged.
 words must accompany the conduct b. Prosecution may only prove accused’s bad
moral character pertinent to the moral trait
Spontaneous Contemporaneous or involved in the offense charged during rebuttal.
exclamations verbal act

Downloaded by Kayla Kenn Arroyo ([email protected])

 lOMoARcPSD|23552236

Subject: Rules on Evidence

6
c. The good or bad moral character of the 3. When there is difficulty is getting direct and
offended party may be proved if it tends to intelligible answers from a witness who is ignorant,
establish in any reasonable degree the or a child of tender years, or is of feeble-mind, or a
probability or improbability of the offense deaf-mute
charged. 4. Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or
5. Of a witness who is an adverse party or an officer,
2. In civil cases – Evidence of the moral character of a director, or managing agent of a public or private
party is admissible only when pertinent to the issue corporation or of a partnership or association which
of character involved in the case. is an adverse party
3. Evidence of a witness’ good moral character is
admissible only once such character has been MISLEADING QUESTION - A misleading question is one
impeached. which assumes as true a fact not yet testified to by the
witness, or contrary to that which he has previously stated. It
Burden of Proof and Presumptions: is not allowed.
1. matters which need not be proved by a party to an
action are: What are the rights of a witness?
2. allegations contained in the complaint or answer 1. To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or
immaterial to the issues insulting questions, and from harsh or insulting
3. facts which are admitted or which are not denied in demeanor;
the answer, provided they have been sufficiently 2. Not to be detained longer than the interests of
alleged justice require;
4. those which are the subject of an agreed statement 3. Not to be examined except only as to matters
of facts between parties, as well as those admitted pertinent to the issue;
by the party in the course of the proceedings in the 4. Not to give an answer which will tend to subject him
same case to a penalty for an offense unless otherwise
5. those subject to judicial notice provided by law; or
6. facts which are legally presumed 5. Not to give an answer which will tend to degrade his
7. facts peculiarly w/in the knowledge of the opposite reputation, unless it be to the very fact at issue or to
party a fact from which the fact in issue would be
presumed. But a witness must answer to the fact of
What are the rules on impeachment of witnesses? his previous final conviction for an offense.
Exceptions to the rule against repetition of
GENERAL RULE: The party producing a witness is not objections:
allowed to impeach his credibility. 1. where the question has not been answered, it is
necessary to repeat the objection when the
EXCEPTIONS: evidence is again offered or the question again
1. Unwilling or hostile witness – A witness may be asked
considered as unwilling or hostile only if so declared 2. evidence of the same kind as that previously
by the court upon adequate showing of: admitted over objection
a. his adverse interest, 3. incompetency is shown later
b. unjustified reluctance to testify; or 4. objection refers to preliminary question it must be
c. his having misled the party into calling him to repeated when the same question is again asked
the witness stand. (Rule 132, Sec. 12) during the introduction of actual evidence
2. Witness who is an adverse party – 5. objection to evidence was sustained but reoffered at
a later stage of the trial
3. Officer, director, or managing agent of a public or 6. evidence is admitted on condition that its
private corporation or of a partnership or association competency or relevance be shown by further
which is an adverse party. evidence and the condition is not fulfilled, the
In these instances, such witnesses may be objection formerly interposed must be repeated or a
impeached by the party presenting him in all motion to strike out the evidence must be made
respects as if he had been called by the adverse 7. where the court reserves the ruling on objection, the
party, except by evidence of his bad character. objecting party must request a ruling or repeat the
objection
How may an adverse party’s witness be impeached?
1. By contradictory evidence;
2. By evidence that his general reputation for truth, Distinction between presumption of innocence and
honesty, or integrity is bad; reasonable doubt
3. By evidence that he has made at other times
statements inconsistent with his present testimony Presumption of Reasonable Doubt
(a.k.a. “prior inconsistent statements”) Innocence
Conclusion drawn by Condition of mind
LAYING THE PREDICATE - law in favor of citizens produced by proof
1. Confronting the witness with the prior inconsistent resulting from evidence
statements with the circumstances under which they in the case
were made; Evidence introduced by Result of insufficient
2. Asking him whether he made such statements; and law to be considered by proof
3. Giving him a chance to explain the inconsistency. the court
(Rule 132, Sec. 13)

A witness may not be impeached by evidence of OFFER AND OBJECTION

particular wrongful acts. Except that it may be shown by
the examination of the witness, or the record of the OFFER OF EVIDENCE – The court shall consider no
judgment, that he has been convicted of an offense. evidence which has not been formally offered. The purpose
for which the evidence is offered must be specified.
LEADING QUESTION - It is a question which suggests to When to make offer:
the witness the answer which the examining party Testimony of a witness- at the time the witness is
desires. It is not allowed, except: called to testify.
1. On cross-examination; Documentary and object evidence - after the
2. On preliminary matters; presentation of a party's testimonial evidence. Such offer

Downloaded by Kayla Kenn Arroyo ([email protected])

 lOMoARcPSD|23552236

Subject: Rules on Evidence

7
shall be done orally unless allowed by the court to be
done in writing. Power of the court to stop further evidence. - The court
may stop the introduction of further testimony upon any
Objections: particular point when the evidence upon it is already so full
 Objection to evidence offered orally must be made that more witnesses to the same point cannot be reasonably
immediately after the offer is made. expected to be additionally persuasive. But this power should
 Objection to a question propounded in the course of be exercised with caution.
the oral examination of a witness shall be made as
soon as the grounds therefor shall become Evidence on motion. - When a motion is based on facts not
reasonably apparent. appearing of record the court may hear the matter on
 An offer of evidence in writing shall be objected to affidavits or depositions presented by the respective parties,
within three (3) days after notice of the offer unless but the court may direct that the matter be heard wholly or
a different period is allowed by the court. partly on oral testimony or depositions.
 The grounds for the objections must be specified.

When repetition of objection unnecessary. - When it

becomes reasonably apparent in the course of the
examination that the questions asked are of the same
class as those to which objection has been made
(whether sustained or overruled), it shall not be
necessary to repeat the objection, it being sufficient for
the adverse party to record his continuing objection to
such class of questions.

Striking out answer. - Should a witness answer the

question before the adverse party had the opportunity to
voice fully its objection to the same, and such objection
is found to be meritorious, the court shall sustain the
objection and order the answer given to be stricken off
the record.
On motion, the court may also order the striking out
of answers which are incompetent, irrelevant, or
otherwise improper.

Tender of excluded evidence:

a. If documents or things offered are excluded by the
court, the offeror may have the same attached to or
made part of the record.
b. If the evidence excluded is oral, the offeror may
state for the record the name and other personal
circumstances of the witness and the substance of
the proposed testimony.

WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE

Quantum of Proofs

1. Preponderance of evidence (Civil Cases)- In

determining where the preponderance or superior weight
of evidence on the issues involved lies, the court may
consider all the facts and circumstances of the case, the
witnesses' manner of testifying, their intelligence, their
means and opportunity of knowing the facts to which
they are testifying, the nature of the facts to which they
testify, the probability or improbability of their testimony,
their interest or want of interest, and also their personal
credibility so far as the same may legitimately appear
upon the trial. The court may also consider the number
of witnesses, though the preponderance is not
necessarily with the greater number.

2. Proof beyond reasonable doubt (Criminal Cases) -

does not mean such a degree of proof as, excluding
possibility of error, produces absolute certainty. Moral
certainty only is required, or that degree of proof which
produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind.

An extrajudicial confession made by an accused, shall

not be sufficient ground for conviction - unless
corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti.
Circumstantial evidence is sufficient for conviction if:
 There is more than one circumstance;
 The facts from which the inferences are derived are
proven; and
 The combination of all the circumstances' is such as
to produce a conviction beyond reasonable doubt.

3. Substantial evidence (Administrative Cases) - that

amount of relevant evidence which a reasonable mind
might accept as adequate to justify a conclusion.

Downloaded by Kayla Kenn Arroyo ([email protected])