EVIDENCE : after MIDTERMS

DNA evidence -
99.9% and higher it is disputable presumption. The only
conclusive presumption is negative.
Read the vallejo case.
People vs Alicando (STUDY)
Compare pending and post conviction of dna test.
-The court may MOTU PROPIO order a DNA testing. Court order is
not always required. A litigationneed not exist prior to DNA
testing. A court order shall be required only if there is a PENDING
litigation, but not before litigation.
-Privacy of communication, this is an exception.
Admissibillity of photographs in a case pg. 190

In criminal cases except quasi offenses, offer of compromise is an

implied admission of guilt (corroborative only). In civil cases an
offer is not an implied admission of guilt.
------------
Documentary evidence - documents as evidence consists of
writings or any material containing letters, words, numbers,
figures, symbols, or other modes of written expressions offered as
proof of their contents.

Dauverts Test
CASES:
1. npc vs codilla 170491
1. 182835 ang vs ca
2. Ruiz vs cruz apao AM CA 0518P april 12,2005
3. Magtolis vs salud AM CA 0520P sep. 9 2005
4. Aznar vs citibank gr 164273
5. MCC vs san GR 170632
6. Torres vs pagcor GR 193531
7. People vs inujas GR 204894
Assignment :
-------2-10-17-----

DOCUMENT - an original/official paper relied upon as the basis,

proof, or support of anything else, including any writing, book or

1
 instrument conveting informationpertinent to such proof or
support.
-a deed, instrument or other duly authhorized paper, something is
proved.

Electronic Document can also be used for the following purposes:

EEP
1. To establish a right.
2. To extinguish an obligation.
3. To prove or affirm a fact.
Read electronic evidence
BEST EVIDENCE RULE when subject of inquiry is the contents of
the document, no evidence shall be admissible other than the
original document itself, EXCEPT in the ff cases: LCNP
1. Original has been lost/destroyed or cannot be produced in
court, without bad faith on the part of the offeror;
2. Original is in the custody or under the control of the party
against whom the evidence is offered, and the latter fails to
produce it after reasonable notice;
3. Original consists of numerous accounts or other documents
which cannot be examined in court without great loss of time;
4. Original is a public record in the custody of a public officer or
is recorded in a public office.
PURPOSE-prevention of fraud or mistake in the proof of the
contents of a writing.
-Often used as a misnomer bec it is the original document rule or
primary evidence.
For best evidence rule to apply: 1. Subject matter involves a
document. 2. Subject of inquiry is the contents of the document.
-It mat be WAIVED if not raised in the trial, no objections have
been made as to their authenticity and due execution.

Parole evidence will prevail against best evidence bec he did not
question the validity when it was offered.
Public documents vs private documents
Ask the court for DECLARATORY RELIEF for purposes of
remarriage.
MEANING OF ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT pg.225
-------

2
 Cases:
1. Voirdiere examination Ppl vs vista gr 140895
2. Mental incapacity ppl vs mendoza gr 113791
3. dulla vs ca
4. Alvarez vs ramirez gr 143439
5. Manaloto case
6. Gr L25643
7. Zulueta vs ca 253 scra 699
8. Estrada vs desierto

Last link doctrine pg.334 -non-privileged information such as

the identity of the client is protected if the revelation of such
information would reveal privileged information.

Filial privilege - a child cannot be compelled to testify against

an ascendant the exception is in a criminal case.

Penitent privilege
Doctrine of interlocking confession
-------------3-18-17-------------
Doctrine of interlocking confession - Evid. [The doctrine
under which] extra-judicial confessions independently made
without collusion which are identical with each other in their
essential details and are corroborated by other evidence on
record are admissible, as circumstantial evidence, against the
person implicated to show the probability of the latters actual
participation in the commission of the crime. [People v. Molleda,
86 SCRA 667, 701 (1978)].

ZULUETA VS CA
No. Indeed the documents and papers in question are
inadmissible in evidence. The constitutional injunction declaring
"the privacy of communication and correspondence [to be]
inviolable" is no less applicable simply because it is the wife (who
thinks herself aggrieved by her husband's infidelity) who is the
party against whom the constitutional provision is to be enforced.
The only exception to the prohibition in the Constitution is if there
is a "lawful order [from a] court or when public safety or order

3
requires otherwise, as prescribed by law." Any violation of this
provision renders the evidence obtained inadmissible "for any
purpose in any proceeding."

The intimacies between husband and wife do not justify any one
of them in breaking the drawers and cabinets of the other and in
ransacking them for any telltale evidence of marital infidelity. A
person, by contracting marriage, does not shed his/her integrity
or his right to privacy as an individual and the constitutional
protection is ever available to him or to her.

The law insures absolute freedom of communication between the

spouses by making it privileged. Neither husband nor wife may
testify for or against the other without the consent of the affected
spouse while the marriage subsists. Neither may be examined
without the consent of the other as to any communication
received in confidence by one from the other during the marriage,
save for specified exceptions. But one thing is freedom of
communication; quite another is a compulsion for each one to
share what one knows with the other. And this has nothing to do
with the duty of fidelity that each owes to the other.

Ppl vs molleda :
Physical resistance is not an essential element of the felony and
need not be established when intimidation is exercised upon the
victim and the latter submits herself, against her will, to the
rapists embrace because of fear for her life and personal safety.
[8] The moral and physical ascendancy of the father over his
daughter-victim is sufficient to cow her into submission to his
bestial desires.

1 day witness examination rule - Par. 5(i) of Supreme Court

A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC requires that a witness has to be fully
examined in one (1) day only. This rule shall be strictly adhered to
subject to the courts discretion during trial on whether or not to
extend the direct and/or cross-examination for justifiable reasons.
On the last hearing day allotted for each party, he is required to
make his formal offer of evidence after the presentation of his last
witness and the opposing party is required to immediately
interpose his objection thereto. Thereafter, the judge shall make
4
the ruling on the offer of evidence in open court. However, the
judge has the discretion to allow the offer of evidence in writing in
conformity with Section 35, Rule 132.

Judicial affidavit (2) - instead of conducting direct testimony in

court, attorneys will submit affidavits with questions and answers
that witnesses have supplied while under oath. To give opposing
counsel sufficient review time, the affidavits must be submitted at
least five days prior to a preliminary conference in a case or the
hearing of motions. In trial, attorneys cross-examine witnesses
based on the already submitted affidavits.
- Role of judge INQUISITORIAL SYSTEM allows the court to
have an active role in the proceedings to determine the credibility
and the truth of his testimony and elicit the answers that it needs
in resolving the case. The questions of the court chall not be
confined to mere clarificatory questions.

- It should be offered Orally after the testimony of the last

witness.

- A request for issuance of a subpoena ad testificandum or duces

tecum may be availed if a witness unjustifiably declines to
execute a judicial affidavit or refuses without just cause.

Electronic evidence (2) An electronic document is admissible

in evidence if it complies with the rules on admissibility prescribed
by the Rules of Court and related laws and is authenticated in the
manner prescribed by the Rules on Electronic Evidence.
- It shall apply to all civil actions and proceedings, as well as
quasi-judicial and administrative cases.
- Authentication :
1. By evidence that it had been digitally signed by the person
purported to have signed the same;
2. By evidence that other appropriate security procedures or
devices as may be authorized by the Supreme Court or by law for
authentication of electronic documents were applied to the
document; or
3. By other evidence showing its integrity and reliability to the
satisfaction of the judge (Sec. 2, Rule 5).
5
- Hearsay rule not applicable - A memorandum, report, record or
data compilation of acts, events, conditions, opinions, or
diagnoses, made by electronic, optical or other similar means at
or near the time of or from transmission or supply of information
by a person with knowledge thereof, and kept in the regular
course or conduct of a business activity, and such was the regular
practice to make the memorandum, report, record, or data
compilation by electronic, optical or similar means, all of which
are shown by the testimony of the custodian or other qualified
witnesses, is excepted from the rule on hearsay evidence (Sec. 1,
Rule 8).

Note: The presumption provided for in Section 1 of this Rule may

be overcome by evidence of the untrustworthiness of the source
of information or the method or circumstances of the preparation,
transmission or storage thereof (Sec. 2, Rule 8).

Dna evidence rule (2)

DNA evidence - It constitutes the totality of the DNA profiles,
results and other genetic information directly generated from DNA
testing of biological samples (Sec. 3).
Post conviction - Post-conviction DNA testing may be available,
without need of prior court order, to the prosecution or any
person convicted by final and executory judgment.
- Requisites : 1. Existing biological sample;
2. Such sample is relevant to the case; and
3. The testing would probably result in the reversal or
modification of the judgment of conviction (Sec. 6).

The convict or the prosecution may file a petition for a writ of

habeas corpus in the court of origin. In case the court, after due
hearing, finds the petition to be meritorious, it shall reverse or
modify the judgment of conviction and order the release of the
convict, unless continued detention is justified for a lawful cause
(Sec. 10).

Best evidence (1) : GR: It provides that when the subject of the
inquiry is the contents of the document, no evidence shall be
admissible other than the original document itself.

6
XPNs:
1. When the original has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be
produced in court, without bad faith on the part of the offeror;
2. When the original is in the custody or under the control of the
party against whom the evidence is offered, and the latter fails to
produce it after reasonable notice;
3. When the original consists of numerous accounts or other
documents which cannot be examined in court without great loss
of time and the fact sought to be established from them is only
the general result of the whole;
Note: The voluminous records must be made accessible to the
adverse party so that the correctness of the portion produced or
summary of the document may be tested on cross-examination.
4. When the original is a public record in the custody of a public
officer or is recorded in a public office (Sec. 3)
Note: Where the issue is only as to whether such a document was
actually executed, or exists, or on the circumstances relevant to
or surrounding its execution, the best evidence rule does not
apply and testimonial evidence is admissible.
- The rule will come into play only when the subject of inquiry is
the contents of a document.
- Secondary evidence is that which shows that better or primary
evidence exists as to the proof of the fact in question. It is the
class of evidence that is relevant to the fact in issue, it being first
shown that the primary evidence of the fact is not obtainable. It
performs the same functions as that of primary evidence.
(Francisco, p. 68, 1992 ed.)
Note: All originals must be first accounted for before one can
resort to secondary evidence. It must appear that all of them
have been lost or destroyed or cannot be produced in court. The
non-production of the original document, unless it falls under any
of the exceptions in Sec. 3, Rule 130, gives rise to the
presumption of suppression of evidence.
- It may be admitted only by laying the basis for its production
and such requires compliance with the following:
1. The offeror must prove the due execution and existence of the
original document;
2. The offeror must show the cause of its unavailability; and

7
3. The offeror must show that the unavailability was not due to his
bad faith.

Definite evidentiary rule when the law specifically provides

for the class and quantum of secondary evidence to establish the
contents of a document, such requirement is controlling. Ex.
Evidence of a lost notarial will should consist of a testimony of at
least two credible witnesses who can clearly and distinctly
establish its contents.

Parole evidence rule (1) - It states that when the terms of an

agreement have been reduced to writing, it is considered as
containing all the terms agreed upon and there can be, between
the parties and their successors-in-interest, no evidence of such
terms other than the contents of the written agreement (Sec. 9).
Note: Parol evidence rule does not apply, and may not properly be
invoked by either party to the litigation against the other, where
at least one party to the suit is not a party or privy of a party to
the written instrument in question and does not base a claim or
assert a right originating in the instrument of the relation
established thereby. Thus, if one of the parties to the case is a
complete stranger to the contract involved therein, he is not
bound by this rule and can introduce extrinsic evidence against
the efficacy of the writing.

XPNs - A party may present evidence to modify, explain or add

to the terms of the written agreement if he puts in issue in his
pleadings the following:
1. An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the written
agreement;
2. Failure of the written agreement to express the true intent of
the parties thereto;
3. Validity of the written agreement; or
4. Existence of other terms agreed to by the parties or their
successors in interest after the execution of the written
agreement.

PAROL EVIDENCE RULE BEST EVIDENCE RULE

Presupposes that the original The original document is not

8
document is available in court available or there is a dispute as
to whether said writing is original
Prohibits the varying of the Prohibits the introduction of
terms of a written agreement secondary evidence in lieu of the
original document regardless of
whether or not it varies the
contents of the original
Applies only to documents Applies to all kinds of writings
which are contractual in nature
except wills
s
Can be invoked only when the Can be invoked by any party to
controversy is between the an action whether he has
parties to the written participated or not in the writing
agreement, their privies, or any involved
party affected thereby like a
cestui que trust

Impeachment of witness - It is a technique employed usually

as part of cross-examination to discredit a witness testimony by
attacking his credibility.
Methods of impeaching :

BY BY EVIDENCE THAT BY PRIOR INCONSISTENT

CONTRADICT HIS GENERAL STATEMENTS
ORY REPUTATION FOR LAYING THE PREDICATE"
EVIDENCE TRUTH, HONESTY, OR
INTEGRITY OF THE
WITNESS IS BAD
Refers to the Since the weight of the Refer to statements, oral or
prior witness testimony documentary, made by the
testimony of depends on his witness sought to be
the same credibility, he may be impeached on occasions
witness or impeached by other than the trial in which
other impairing his credibility he is testifying
evidence by showing his not
presented by pleasing reputation but
him in the only as regards his
same case, reputation for truth,

9
but not the honesty or integrity
testimony of
other witness

-GR: A witness may not be impeached by evidence of particular

wrongful acts.
XPN: If it may be shown by the examination of the witness, or the
record of the judgment, that he has been convicted of an offense
(Sec. 11).

GR: A party may not impeach his own witness.

XPN: The witness is an:
1. unwilling or adverse witness so declared by the court;
2. adverse party; or
3. officer of the adverse party who is a juridical person (Sec. 12).
Note: In these instances, such witnesses may be impeached by
the party presenting him in all respects as if he had been called
by the adverse party, except by evidence of his bad character.

Character evidence (1) - GR: Character evidence is not

admissible in evidence.
XPN:
1. Criminal cases:
a. The accused may prove his good moral character which is
pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense charged;
b. The prosecution may not prove the bad moral character of the
accused which is pertinent to the moral trait involved in the
offense charged, unless in rebuttal when the latter opens the
issue by introducing evidence of his good moral character; or
c. As to the offended party, his good or bad moral character may
be proved as long as it tends to establish in any reasonable
degree the probability or improbability of the offense charged.
XPN to the XPN:
i. In rebuttal, proof of the bad character of the victim is not
admissible if the crime was committed through treachery and
premeditation; and

10
ii. In rape cases, the evidence of complainants past sexual
conduct, or reputation or opinion thereof shall not be admitted
unless and only to the extent that the court finds that such
evidence is material and relevant to the case (Rape shield, Sec. 6,
R.A. 8505).

2. Civil cases The moral character of either party thereto cannot

be proved unless it is pertinent to the issue of character involved
in the case (Sec. 51).
Note: As to witnesses to both criminal and civil actions, the bad
moral character of a witness may always be proved by either
party but not evidence of his good moral character, unless such
character has been impeached (Sec. 14, Rule 132).

Hearsay evidence - Any evidence, whether oral or documentary,

and its probative value is not based on personal knowledge of the
witness but on the knowledge of some other person not on the
witness stand. It also includes all assertions where, though
derived from personal knowledge, the adverse party is not given
an opportunity to cross-examine.

HEARSAY EVIDENCE OPINION EVIDENCE

Consists of testimony that is
not based on personal
knowledge of the person
testifying
Expert evidence based on
the personal knowledge,
skill, experience or training
of the person testifying and
evidence of an ordinary
witness on limited matters

Res gestae - It is a Latin phrase which literally means "things

done." As an exception to the hearsay rule, it refers to those
exclamations and statements by either the participants, victims,
or spectators to a crime immediately before, during or
immediately after the commission of the crime, when the
circumstances are such that the statements were made as
spontaneous reactions or utterances inspired by the excitement of

11
the occasion, and there was no opportunity for the declarant to
deliberate and fabricate a false statement.

RES GESTAE DYING DECLARATION

It is the event itself which
speaks
May be made by the killer
after or during the killing or
that of a third person
May precede, or
accompany or follow the
principal act
Justification is the
spontaneity of the
statement
A sense of impending death takes
the place of an oath and the law
regards the declarant as testifying
Can be made by the victim only
Confined to matters occurring after
the homicidal act
Justification is the trustworthiness,
being given by the person who was
aware of his impending death

Moral character of witness evidence of good character of a

witness admissible?A:GR: No.
XPN: When such character has been impeached.

-Evidence of bad moral character of the accused be presented - In

a criminal case, the prosecution cannot prove the bad moral
character of the accused in its evidence-in-chief. It can only do so
in rebuttal.
- The accused may prove his good moral character when
pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense charged.
- The good or bad moral character of the offended party may be
proved by the accused if it tends to establish in any reasonable
degree the probability or improbability of the offense charged.

Child witness - 2 hearsay does not apply to child witness. Every

child is presumed qualified to be a witness. However, the court
shall conduct a competency examination of a child, motu proprio
or on motion of a party, when it finds that substantial doubt exists
regarding the ability of the child to perceive, remember,
communicate, distinguish truth from falsehood, or appreciate the
duty to tell the truth in court.

12
- Corroboration shall not be required of a testimony of a child. His
testimony, if credible by itself, shall be sufficient to support a
finding of fact, conclusion, or judgment subject to the standard of
proof required in criminal and non-criminal cases.
- Note: The straightforward testimony of a child witness can be
given full weight and credit. When a child says that she has been
raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape
has indeed been committed. The silence of a rape victim or failure
to immediately disclose her plight to the authorities is no proof at
all that the charges are baseless or fabricated. More often than
not, a victim would bear the ignominy and pain in private rather
than reveal her shame to the whole world or risk the danger of
physical harm by the rapist.

- A statement made by a child describing any act or attempted

act of child abuse, not otherwise admissible under the hearsay
rule, may be admitted in evidence in any criminal or non-criminal
proceeding subject to the following rules:
1. Before such hearsay statement maybe admitted, its proponent
shall make known to the adverse party the intention to offer such
statement and its particulars to provide him a fair opportunity to
object.
a. If the child is available, the court shall, upon motion of the
adverse party, require the child to be present at the presentation
of the hearsay statement for cross-examination by the adverse
party.
b. When the child is unavailable, the fact of such circumstance
must be proved by the proponent.
2. In ruling on the admissibility of such hearsay statement, the
court shall consider the time, content and circumstances thereof,
based on various factors provided by the law, which provide
sufficient indicia of reliability.
CHILD WITNESS ORDINARY WITNESS
Only the judge is allowed Opposing counsels are allowed to ask questions
to ask questions to a child during preliminary examination
witness during preliminary
examination
Testimony in a narrative Testimony in a narrative form is not allowed
form is allowed

13
Leading questions are Leading questions are generally not allowed
allowed
The child witness is An ordinary witness is not assisted by a support
assisted by a support person
person

Sexual abuse shield rule - GR: It states that the following

evidence is not admissible in any criminal proceeding involving
alleged child sexual abuse:
1. Evidence offered to prove that the alleged victim engaged in
other sexual behavior; and
2. Evidence offered to prove the sexual predisposition of the
alleged victim

XPN: Evidence of specific instances of sexual behavior by the

alleged victim to prove that a person other than the accused was
the source of semen, injury, or other physical evidence shall be
admissible.

Credibility vs competency
Competent vs credible witness
Competency of a Credibility of a Witness
Witness
Has reference to the Refers to the believability of
basic qualifications of the witness and has nothing
a witness as his to do with the law or the
capacity to perceive rules. (Ibid).
and his capacity to
communicate his
perception to others.

Tender of excluded evidence - When an attorney is not allowed

by the court to present testimony which he thinks is competent,
material and necessary to prove his case, he must make an offer
of proof. This is the method properly preserving the record to the
end that the question may be saved for purposes of review.
Midterm questions ebalik
Exam march 29 5-9pm

14