CHAPTERI -Rulesofprocedurearetoolsdesi

gnedtof acil
it
atet
he
att
ainmentofjusti
ce,andcourtsmustavoidt hei
rstr
ictand
PRELI
MINARYCONSI
DERATI
ONS ri
gidappli
cati
onwhi chwouldresul
tintechnicali
ti
esthatt
end
tofrust
rat
eratherthanpromotesubstanti
aljusti
ce.(
Douglas
I
. BASI
CCONCEPTSONEVI
DENCE F.AnamavsPhi l
i
ppineSavingsBank,201 2)

-Theruleonliber
alconst
ructi
ondoesnotmeanthat
procedural
rulesaretobeignoredordi
sdai
nedatwi
llt
osui
t
t
heconveni enceoftheparty
1.Evi
denceDef
ined
*Procedur all
awhasi tsownr ationaleintheor derly
Sec.1,Rul
e128oftheRul
esofCour
tpr
ovi
desf
ort
he
admi ni
strati
onofj ust
ice,namel y,toensur et heeffect
ive
def
ini
ti
onofevi
dence
enforcementofsubst anti
ver i
ght sbypr ovidingforasyst em
Sec.1,Evidencedef i
ned-ist
hemeanssancti
onedbythese thatobviatesar bi
trar
iness,caprice,despot ism,or
rul
es,ofascert
aininginajudi
cial
proceedi
ngt
hetr
uth whimsical i
tyintheset t
lementofdi sputes( AbrenicavsLaw
respect
ingamat teroffact
. Firm ofAbr enica,Tungol andTibayan,2006;ReyesvsFi l-
Estate2007)

-Theliber
alconst
ruct
ioni
snotali
censetoviol
atepr
ocedur
al
DI
STI
NCTI
ONBETWEENEVI
DENCEANDPROOF
requir
ements.Theyaredesi
gnedtofaci
l
it
atethe
EVI
DENCE PROOF adjudi
cati
onofcases.

I
sthemedium ofproofor I
stheeff
ectorr
esul
tof *Theli
ber
ali
tyi
nthei
rint
erpr
etat
ionandappl
i
cation
t
hemeanssanctionedby evi
dence ofther
ulesappli
esonlyi
npropercasesandunderj
usti
fi
able
t
herul
esinascert
aini
ngthe ci
rcumstances.
t
rut
hrespect
ingamat t
erof *Concomi t
anttoaprocedureadopt i
ngali
beral
f
act constructi
onoft herul
esshoul
dbeanef f
ortonthepartof
thepar t
yinvokingli
beral
it
ytoexpl
ainhisfai
luret
oabideby
therules.AbrenicavsLawFirm ofAbreni
ca,Tungoland
DISTI
NCTI
ONBETWEENFACTUM PROBANDUM and Tibayan,2006,BanezvsDel aSall
e,2006)
FACTUM PROBANS
-
InRur
alBanker
svsTanghal
-Sal
vana,t
hecour
thel
dthat
:
FACTUM PROBANDUM FACTUM PROBANS
*
Obedi encetotherequir
ementsofpr oceduralrul
es
Ist
heult
imat
efactorfact
s I
st heevident
iar
yfactor i
sneededifthepar t
iesaretoexpectf
airresult
stheref
rom,
soughtt
obeestabl
ished factsbywhichfactum andut
terdisr
egar doftherul
escannotjustl
yber at
ional
ized
probandum istobe byhar
kingont hepol i
cyofli
ber
alconst
ruction.
establ
ished.
*Thel
iber
ali
tyint
heint
erpr
etat
ionandappl
i
cationof
therul
esappli
esonlyinpr
opercasesandunderj
ust
if
iable
cir
cumstances
2. Whati
sthenat
ureoft
her
ulesonevi
dence
* Whi l
eitistr
uethatli
ti
gati
onisnotagameof
-procedural
,waivabl
einchar
act
erandcanbesubj
ectt
othe
techni
calit
ies,iti
sequall
ytruethateverycasemustbe
sti
pulat
ionofthepart
ies
prosecutedi naccordancewiththeprescribedpr
ocedureto
-
provi
dedi
tisnotcont
rar
ytoaw,mor
als,andpubl
i
cpol
i
cy ensureanor derl
yandspeedyadmi ni
str
ationofj
ust
ice(MCA
-MBFCount downCar dsPhil
i
ppinesetal vsMBFCar d
3. Const
ruct
ionoft
heRul
esonevi
denceUndert
he I
nternati
onal,201 2)
Rul
esofCourt
-Itshouldbeemphasi zedthattheresortt
oal i
beral
-i
tshal
lbel
iberal
l
yconstruedinordertopr omotethei
r appl i
cati
on,orsuspensionoftheapplicat
ionofprocedural
obj
ecti
veofsecuri
ngajust,speedyandi nexpensi
ve rules.Mustr emai
nast heXPNt othewel l
-sett
ledpri
nci
ple
di
sposi
ti
onofeveryact
ionandpr oceeding thatrulesmustbecompl i
edwithforthe order
ly
admi nist
rat
ionofjust
ice.
-iti
sproperwherethelapseintheli
ter
al obser
vanceofa
ruleofprocedur
ehasnotpr ej
udicedtheadversepart
yand 4. Const
ruct
ionofel
ect
roni
cEvi
denceRul
e
hasnotdepr i
vedthecourtofi
tsauthori
ty.
Sec2,Rule1oft heElectr
onicEvidenceRule( AM No.06- 4. Di
rectEvi
dence-istheki
ndofevi
dencei
fbel
i
eved
11-5-SC,Oct
ober15,2007)pr ovi
desfortheliberal pr
ovesthefacti
nissue.
constr
ucti
onofther ul
esandi t
sori
gintheobjectofwhi chi
s
-
iti
snott
heonl
ysour
ceoft
heconcl
usi
onoft
het
rai
lcour
t
topromoteajust,speedy,andinexpensi
vedi sposit
ionof
everyact
ionandpr oceedings.I
tst
atesthat: -Therulesofevidenceall
owat ri
alcourtt
orel
yon
ci
rcumstanti
alevidencetosupportit
sconclusi
onof
Sec.2CONSTRUCTI
ON
guil
t.
(Peopl
evsFeder icoLucero,2011)
HOW WILLTHEELECTRONI
CEVI
DENCERULEBE
5. Circumstanti
alEvidence-isthatevi
dencewhich
CONSTRUED?
provesaf actorseriesoffact
sfrom whi
chthefact
s
TheseRulesshallbel
iber
all
yconstr
uedtoassistt
he i
ni ssuemaybeest abli
shedbyinfer
ence.(
DeLeon
par
ti
esi
nobtaini
ngaj ust
,expedi
ti
ousandinexpensi
ve vsPeople,2008)
det
ermi
nati
onifcases.
6. Demonst
rat
iveEvi
dence-i
sthekindofevi
dence
WHATI
STHEORI
GINOFTHERULE? whi
chdemonstr
atest
herealt
hing.

Theint
erpretati
onoftheseRulesshall
alsotakei
nto 7. Corrobor
ati
veEvidence-i
stheki
ndofevi
dence
consi
derati
onintheinternat
ional
ori
ginofRepublicAct8792, whichmerelysuppl
ementsevi
dencewhi
chhas
other
wiseknownast heEl ectr
oni
cCommer ceAct. al
readybeengiventendi
ngtost
rengt
hent
hesame.

5. Const
ruct
ionofChi
l
dWi
tnessExami
nat
ionRul
e WHENI
TISNECESSARY

Sec3oftheRul
eonExaminati
onofaChi
l
dWi
tness(
AM -onl
ywhent herearereasonst
owar rantthesuspici
ont
hat
No.004-
07-SC,December15,2000) thewit
nessfal
sif
iedthetrut
horthathisobservat
ionhad
beeninaccur
ate.(Peopl
evsBudo,201 3)
Sec.3CONSTRUCTI
ONOFTHERULE
TESTI
MONYOFANINFORMANTISMERELY
Thi
sRul
eshal
lbel
i
ber
all
yconst
rued:
CORROBORATI
VEANDCUMULATIVETOTHATOFTHE
1
. Touphol
dthebesti
nter
estoft
hechi
l
d,and POSEUR-
BUYER

2. Topromot
emaxi mum accommodati
onofchil
d Not
e:
wit
nesswi
thoutprej
udi
cetotheci
nst
it
uti
onal
right
s
a. Thepr esent
at i
onofani nf
ormantdoesnotvi ti
ate
oft
heaccused.
theprosecution’scauseashi stesti
monyi snot
i
ndispensablet oasuccessf ulprosecuti
onf ordrug-
pushingsincei twouldbemer el
ycor r
obor ati
veof,
6. Rul
esofEvidenceNotStr
ict
lyAppl
i
edi
n andcumul ativewi t
h,thatoftheposeur -buyerwho
Admini
str
ati
veProceedi
ngs waspr esentedi ncourtandt est
ifi
edont hef act
s
andci r
cumst ancesoft hesaleanddel i
veryoft he
-ar
enotstr
ict
lyappl
i
edi
nproceedi
ngsbefor
eadmi
nis
trat
ive
prohi
biteddrug.( PeoplevsAndr es,2011 )
bodi
essuchastheBOM (
Ati
enzavsBoardofMedi
ci
ne)
b. Theal i
bi anddefenseoffr
ame- upbecomeless
7. Whatar
etheKi
ndsofEvi
dence
plausiblewhent heyar
ecor r
oborat
edonlyby
1
. ObjectorRealEvidence-ki
ndofevi dencewhichis relat
ivesandf r
iendsbecauseofpercei
ved
di
rectl
yaddressedtothesensesoft hecourtand i
mpar t
iali
ty(
PeoplevsReyes,2009)
consi
stsoftangi
blethi
ngsexhibi
ted,viewedor
demonstrat
edinopencour t(
sec.1 ,Rule130)
8. Cumul
ati
veEvi
dence-ist
hekindofevi
dencewhi
ch
2. Document aryEvidence-isanevi dencewhi ch
i
soft
hesamekindandcharactert
endi
ngtopr
ove
consist
sofwr i
ti
nganymat eri
alcontai
ninglett
ers,
t
hesameproposi
ti
on.
words,number s,fi
gures,symbolsorot hermodes
ofwr i
tt
enexpressionofferedaspr oofoftheir 9. Posi
ti
veEvi
dence(test
imony)
-isthekindof
contents.(
Sec.2,Rule1 30) evi
dencei
nwhichawi t
nessaff
ir
mst hatafactdi
d
ordi
dnotoccur
.(PeoplevsAl
fonso,1978)
3. Testi
moni al
Evi
dence-isanoral
evi
dencegi
venby
thewitnessont
hewitnessst
andori
nany Not
e:
proceeding.
a. Posi
ti
veI
dent
if
icat
ionwher
e:
 1
. Cat
egor
ical
andconsi
stent
,and mustest
abl
i
shhi
scasebyapr
eponder
anceofevi
dence.

2. Wi
thoutshowingofi
ll
mot i
veonthepar
toft
heeye 15.ProofBeyondReasonabl
eDoubt-i
stherequi
red
wi
tnesst
esti
fyi
ngoverthematt
er quantum ofevi
dencei
nordert
oconvi
ctanaccused.

-Prevail
soveradenialwhich,i
fnotsubst
antiatedby -Ajudgmentofconvict
ionmustrestonnothi
ngl
ess
cl
earandconvincingevi
denceisnegati
veandself-serving thanmoralcert
aint
yinanunprejudi
cedmindthati
twasthe
evi
denceundes er
vingofweighti
nlaw. accusedwhocommi t
tedthecri
me,fai
li
ngwhi cht
he
accusedmustbeexoner at
ed.
-Theycannotbegivengreat
erevi
denti
aryval
ue
overthetest
imonyofcredi
blewit
nesseswhotesti
fyon -I
ftheprosecut
ionfai
ledtodischar
geitsburdenof
aff
ir
mativematter
s(PeoplevsPi
osang,2013) est
abli
shi
ngt heguil
toft
heaccused,itisunnecessarytost
il
l
passontheaccused’sdefense.(PeoplevsRubio,2009)
1
0.Negat
iveEvi
dence-i
sat
est
imonyt
hatacer
tai
n
f
actdi
dnotexist
.

Not
e: 16.ClearandConvinci
ngEvidence-isakindof
evidencewhichest
abl
ishesinthemindsofatr
ierof
a. Deni
alandAl
i
biar
enegat
ivedef
enses
factsafi
rm bel
i
efontheexist
enceofthefacti
n
GR:theyar eself
-ser
vingnegati
veevidence;they i
ssue.
cannotprevailovert
hespontaneous,posi
tive,and
17.Compet
entevi
dence-i
sthekindofevi
dencewhi
ch
credi
bletesti
moniesoftheprosecut
ionwitnesses
i
snotot
her
wiseexcl
udedbythelaworrul
es.
whopoi ntedtoandidenti
fi
edtheaccused.
18.I
ncompetentEvi
dence-t
hekindofevi
dencewhi
ch
i
sexcl
udedbylaworbytherules.
1
1.Pri
maFaci eEvidence-Theter
m“ primaf acie
19.RelevantEvi
dence-ki
ndofevi
dencewhichhasa
evidence”denotesevidencewhich,ifunexplained
rel
ati
ontothefacti
nis
sue.(
Sec.3,Rul
e130)
oruncont r
adict
edissuffi
ci
entt
osust ainthe
proposit
ionitsupport
sortoestabl
ishthef act
s. 20.Mat eri
al Evi
dence-onethati
sdirect
edtoprovea
factinissueasdeterminedbytherul
eson
-pr
imafaci
emeansi ti
ssuff
ici
entt
oestabl
i
shaf
act
substantivelawandpleadi
ngs(Bauti
stavsAparece)
orrai
seapresumpti
onUNLESSdi sprovedorr
ebutt
ed
(Republ
i
cvsSandiganBayan,2011) 21.Rebut t
alevidence-isanycompet entevi
denceto
explai
n,repeal,counter
act,ordisproveadversar
y’s
1
2.Concl
usi
veEvi
dence-isanevi
dencewhi
ch
proof.Iti
sreceivabl
eonlywher enewmat t
ershave
est
abl
i
shest
hefact.(
USvsPons)
beendevel opedbyt heevidenceofoneoft he
1
3.Substanti
alEvidence-i nproceedingsbef ore part
iesandi sgenerall
yli
mitedtoar eplyt
onew
administ
rat
iveandquasi -j
udici
alagencies,the matters(AgoTi mberCor porat
ionvsAbaya,1 978)
quantum ofevidencer equiredtoestabl
ishaf acti
s
22.Sur-Rebutt
alEvi
dence-evi
denceinrepl
ytoorto
Substant
ialevidenceort hatlevel
ofevidencewhi ch
rebutnewmat t
eri
ntr
oducedinrebut
tal
.(Sandakan
areasonablemi ndmi ghtacceptasadequat eto
vsSero,1964)
j
usti
fyaconcl usion.(
SagunvsSunAceI nter
nati
onal
Management ,2011) 23.Pri
mar yEvidence-kindofevidencewhichassur es
thegreatestcer
tai
ntyoffactsoughttobepr oved,
1
4.Preponder anceofEvidence-isthewei ght
,cr
edit
andwhi chdoesnoti nit
sel
f,i
ndicat
etheexistence
andval ueoftheaggregateevidenceonei t
hersi
de
ofotherandbet t
erproof(Delt
aMot orSal
es
andi susuall
yconsi
deredt obesynonymouswi th
Corporati
onvsBer nardo,1981)
theterm“ great
erweightoftheevidence”or
“greaterweightoft
hecr edi
bleevidence” 24.Secondar
yevi
dence-i
sanyevi
denceot
hert
han
t
hedocumenti
tsel
f
-
iti
saphrasewhichmeansprobabil
i
tyoftrut
hthat
i
smor econvi
nci
ngtothecourtaswort
hyofbel i
eft
hatwhich Exampl
e:
i
soffer
edinopposi
ti
ontheret
o(Cavi
l
evsLitania-Hong,
a. Acopy
2009)
b. Reci
tal
ofi
tscont
ent
sinsomeaut
hent
icdocument
-
inci
vi
lcases,t
hepar
tyhavi
ngbur
denofpr
oof
 c. Recol
l
ect
ionoft
hewi
tness(
Sec.4,Rul
e130) 8. Rul
e11
5oft
heRul
esonCr
imPr
o

25.Evi
denceinChi ef
-ist
hepri
maryandmain 9. RA4200Ant
i-wi
ret
appi
ngAct
evi
dencepresentedbythepar
ti
est
oprovethei
r
1
0.RA9372HumanSecur
it
iesAct
causeordefense.
1
1.Subst
ant
iveandRemedi
alSt
atut
e
26.Newlydi
scoveredEvidence-mustbeonet hat
coul
dnot,byexerci
seofduedil
igence,havebeen 1
2.Judi
cial
deci
si
ons
di
scover
edbeforethetri
ali
nthecourtbelow.

-Thedetermi
nati
vetesti
sthepresenceofdueor
reasonabl
edil
i
gencetolocat
ethethingt
obeusedas 10.Scopeoft
heRul
esofEvi
dence
evidencei
nthetr
ial
Sec.2,Rul
e128oft
heRul
esofCour
tpr
ovi
dest
hat
-Fornewt r
ial
tobegr ant
edonthegr
oundofnewl
y
Sec.2SCOPE
discover
edevidence,thefol
l
owi
ngaret
hecondi
ti
ons:
Ther ul
esofevidenceshal
lbet
hesameinal
lcour
ts
a. Theevi
dencemusthavebeendi
scover
edaf
tert
he
andi
nal
ltri
alsandheari
ngsEXCEPTasother
wisepr
ovi
ded
tr
ial
byl
awortheseRules.
b. Theevidencecoul
dnothavebeendiscover
edat
11.Scopeoft
heDNAEvi
denceRul
e
thetr
ialevenwi
ththeexer
ciseofr
easonabl
e
dil
i
gence; Sec.1oft
heDNAEvi
denceRul
e(AM No06-
11-
5-SC)
provi
dest
hat
c. Theevi
dencei
smater
ialnotmer
elycumul
ati
ve,
cor
robor
ati
veori
mpeaching Sec1
.SCOPE

d. Theevi
dencemustaffectt
hemer it
softhecase Thi
sRuleshal
lappl
ywheneverDNAevidenceas
andproduceadi
ffer
entresul
tifadmit
ted.(
Bri
ones def
inedinSect
ion3hereof
,isof
fer
ed,usedorpr
oposedto
vsPeopl
e,2009) beoffer
edorusedasevidencein:

1
. Al
lcr
imi
nal
act
ions

8. Hi
erar
chyi
fEvi
dent
iar
yVal
ues 2. Ci
vi
lact
ions
;and

Hi
ghestLevel
-Pr
oofBeyondReasonabl
eDoubt 3. Speci
alpr
oceedi
ngs

-
ClearandConvi
nci
ngEvi
dence

-
Preponder
anceofEvi
dence 12.Appl
icati
onofotherpr
ovi
si
onsoftheRul
esof
CourtandtheRulesonEvi
dencet
oDNAEvidence
Last
-Subst
ant
ial
Evi
dence
Rul
e
9. Whatar
etheSour
cesoft
heRul
esonEvi
dence
Sec.2oft heDNAEvidenceRul
e(AM No06-11-5-SC)
1
. 1
987Const
it
uti
on providesf
orther
uleontheappl
i
cati
onofot
herrul
esof
evidencei
nDNAevi dence.
2. Rul
es1
28-
134oft
heRoC
Sec.2APPLI
CATI
ONOFOTHERRULESONEVI
DENCE
3. Resolut
ionoft
heSCdatedMarch1
4,1
989ont
he
proposedrul
esonevi
dence; Inall
mattersnotspeci
fi
call
ycover
edbyt hi
sRul
e,
theRulesofCourtandotherpert
inentpr
ovi
sionsofl
awon
4. Judi
cialAff
idavi
tRul
e(AM No1
2-8-
8-SC,ef
fect
ive evidenceshal
lapply.
January1,2013)
13.Appl
icat
ionoft
heRulesofCour
ttot
heChi
l
d
5. Chi
ldWit
nessExaminat
ionRul
e(AM No004-
07-
SC, Wit
nessExaminat
ionRul
e
December15,2000)
Sec1oftheChil
dWi t
nessExaminat
ionRul
e(AM No004-
6. DNAEvi denceRul
e(AM No06-
11-
5-SC,Oct
ober 07-SC)pr
ovi
desfortherul
eontheappli
cat
ionoft
heChi
ld
15,2007) Wit
nessExaminat
ionRul
e

7. El
ect
roni
cEvi
denceRul
e(AM No01
-7-
01-
SC) Sec.1APPLI
CABI
LITYOFTHERULE
 Unlessot
herwi
seprovi
ded,t
hisRul
eshal
lgover
n 4. Theinvest
igat
ingoff
icer
sandbodi
esauthor
izedby
t
heexaminati
onofchi
ldwi
tnesseswho: theSCt or
eceiveevi
dence,i
ncl
udi
ngtheIBP;and

1
. Ar
evi
cti
msoft
hecr
ime 5. Thespecial
courtsandquasi-judi
ci
al bodies,whose
rul
esofprocedurearesubjecttodis
appr ovalofthe
2. Accusedofacr
ime,and
SC,insof
arastheirexi
sti
ngrulesofprocedur e
3. Wi
tnes
sest
ocr
ime contr
avenetheprovisi
onsofthisRule.

I
tshallappl
yinal
lcr
iminalandnon-
cri
minal 6. Forpurposeofbr evit
y,t
heabovecour t
s,quasi
-
pr
oceedi
ngsinvolvi
ngchi
l
dwi t
nesses. j
udici
albodies,orinvest
igat
ingof
ficer
sshall
be
uni
for
ml yrefer
redt ohereasthe“court
”
14.ScopeofEl
ect
roni
cEvi
denceRul
e

Sec1oftheEl
ect
roni
cEvi
denceRul
e(AM No01-
7-01-
SC)
provi
dest
hat 17.Appli
cat
ionoft
heJudi
cial
Aff
idavi
tRul
einCr
imi
nal
cases
Sec1.SCOPE
Sec.9APPLI
CATI
ONOFRULETOCRI
MINALACTI
ONS
Unl
essot
her
wisepr
ovi
dedherei
n,t
heseRulesshal
l
appl
ywheneveranel
ectr
oni
cdocumentorel
ectr
oni
cdata a. Thi
sRul
eshal
lappl
ytocr
imi
nal
act
ions:
messageasdefi
nedi
nSecti
on2hereofi
soff
eredorusedin
evi
dence.
1
. Whent hemaximum oft
hei
mposabl
epenal
tydoes
15.Casescover
edbyt
heRul
esonEl
ect
roni
cEvi
dence
notexceedsi
xyear
s;
Sec2oftheElect
roni
cEvi
denceRul
e(AM No01-
7-01-
SC)
2. Wheret
heaccusedagr eest
otheuseofjudi
ci
al
provi
dest
hat
:
af
fi
davi
ts,i
rr
espect
iveofpenal
tyi
nvol
ved;or
Sec2.CASESCOVERED
3. Wit
hr espectt
othecivi
laspectoft
heact
ions,
TheseRul
esshal
lappl
ytoal
lci
vi
lact
ionsand whateverthepenal
ti
esinvol
vedare.
proceedi
ngs,aswel
lasquasi
-j
udi
ci
alandadmini
str
ati
ve
cases.
b. Thepr osecuti
onshal lsubmi tt
hej udi
ci
al
Not
e:
aff
idavit
sofitswi t
nessesnotl aterthanfive
-El
ectr
onicEvi
denceRuleappl
iesonlyci
vi
lact
ionsandquasi daysbef orethepr e-
trial,servingcopiesoft he
-j
udici
alandadmini
str
ati
vepr
oceedingsandnottocri
minal sameupont heaccused.Thecompl ai
nantor
cases. publi
cpr osecutorshall attachtot heaff
idavi
ts
suchdocument aryorobj ectevidenceashe
mayhave,mar kingthem asExhi bit
sA,B,Cand
soon.Nof urt
herjudicial affi
davit
,document ary,
16.ScopeofAppl
i
cat
ionoft
heJudi
cial
Aff
idavi
tRul
e
orobjectevidenceshal lbeadmi t
tedatthetrial
.
Sec1oft
heJudi
cial
Aff
idavi
tRul
epr
ovi
dest
hat
:
c. Iftheaccuseddesi restobehear donhi s
Sec1.SCOPE def enseafterr
eceiptofthej udicialaff
idavi
tsof
thepr osecuti
on,heshal l
havet heopt i
ont o
Thi
sRuleshal
lappl
ytoall
acti
ons,pr
oceedi
ngsand
submi thisj
udici
alaffi
davitaswel lasthoseof
i
nci
dent
srequi
ri
ngtherecept
ionofevi
dencebefor
e:
hiswi t
nessestothecour twi t
hint endaysf rom
1
. TheMet r
opoli
tanTr i
alCourt
s,Munici
palTr
ialCourts receiptofsuchaf f
idavi
tsandser veacopyof
i
nciti
es,MunicipalTrai
lCourt
s,Munici
palCir
cuit eachont hepubli
candpr ivatepr osecutor,
Tri
alCourt
s,andt heShari
’aCircui
tCour
tsbutshall i
ncl udinghisdocument arymar kedasExhi bit
s1,
notapplytosmal lcl
aimscasesunderAM No08- 8- 2,3andsoon.Theseaf f
idavitsshallserveas
7-SC directtest
imoniesoftheaccusedandhi s
witnesseswhent heyappearbef orethecour tto
2. TheRTCandt
heShar
i’
aDi
str
ictCour
ts testif
y.

3. TheSnadi
ganbayan,CTA,CAandShar
i’
aAppel
l
ate
Cour
ts
 18.I
nwhatcaseswi
l
ltheRul
esonEvi
dencenotappl
y MonetaryInst
rument ,pr
operty,orproceeds
repr
esenti
ng,invol
vingorr el
ati
ngtoanunl awf
ul
Sec4Rule1oftheRul esofCivi
lProcedureprovidesf
orthe
acti
vi
tyormoneyl aunderingoffenseunderRA
rul
eonthenon-appl
icabil
i
tyoftheprovi
sionsoftheRulesof
9160,asamended.
Courti
ncl
usi
veoftheRulesofEvidence.
Sec1ofAM No 05- 11-04-SC,providesforther uleonthe
Sec.4I
NWHATCASESNOTAPPLI
CABLE
appli
cati
onoft heRulesofCour tincaseofci vi
lforfei
tur
e,
TheseRul
esshal
lnotappl
yto: asset
spr eservati
on,andfreezi
ngofmonet aryinstrument,
propert
y,orpr oceedsrepresent
ing,i
nvolvi
ng,orr el
ati
ngto
1
. El
ect
ioncases anunlawf ulacti
vi
tyormoneyl aunderingoffenseunderRA
9160asamended.
2. LandRegi
str
ati
on
Sec.1APPLI
CABI
LITY
3. Cadast
ral
Xxxx
4. Nat
ural
i
zat
ion,and
TheRevi
sedRulesofCourtshal
lapplysuppletor
y
5. I
nsol
vencypr
oceedi
ngs
whennoti
nconsi
stentwi
tht
heprovisi
onsofthisspecialr
ules.
6. Andot
hercasesnother
einpr
ovi
dedf
or
21.Appl
i
cat
ionoft
heRul
esofCour
ttoLaborCases
XPN:byanalogyori
nasupplet
orychar
act
erandwhenever
pract
icabl
eandconveni
ent
.
22.Admi
ssi
bil
i
tyofEvi
dence
CASESWHICHARENOTDI
RECTLYGOVERNEDBYTHE
RULESOFEVI
DENCE 23.Admi
ssi
bil
i
tyofEl
ect
roni
cDocument

1
. El
ect
ioncases 24.MannerofAut
hent
icat
ionofEl
ect
roni
cDocument

2. LandRegi
str
ati
on 25.Ruleontheadmissi
bil
it
yofvideotapedand
audiot
apedin-
depthinvest
igat
iveordiscl
osur
e
3. Cadast
ral
i
ntervi
ewsinchil
dabusecases.
4. Nat
ural
i
zat
ion,and
26.Ruleontheadmissi
bil
it
yofevi
denceundert
he
5. I
nsol
vencypr
oceedi
ngs “sexual
abuseshi
eldrul
e”

6. Andot
hercasesnotment
ionedi
nSec4ofRul
e1; 27.UseofDeposi
ti
onandi
tsadmi
ssi
bil
i
ty

7. Laborcases; 28.Rul
esonSearchandSei
zur
eandt
heAdmi
ssi
bil
i
ty
ofEvi
dence
8. I
mpeachmentcases
29.Const
it
uti
onal
pr ovi
si
onsontheadmissi
bil
it
yoft
he
SUPPLETORYAPPLI
CATI
ONOFTHERULESOFCOURT
Evi
denceinvi
olati
onoftheRi
ghtst
oSear chand
-TheRulesmaynonet
hel
essbeappl
i
edi
nsuppl
etor
y Sei
zure
charact
er
30.Rul
eonIll
egalPossessi
onofDangerousDrugs;
-i
tmeansthattheprovi
si
onintheRul
esofCourtwi
ll
be El
ements;Admissi
bil
i
tyofEvi
dence;Chai
nof
madetoapplyonlywhenthereisani
nsuf
fi
ci
encyinthe Cust
odyRule
appl
i
cabl
er ul
e( GSI
SvsVill
avi
za,201
0)
31
.Rul
eont
heuseofdeposi
ti
onasevi
dence
19.Appl
icat
ionoft
heRul
esofCour
tinI
mpeachment
32.Ant
i-wi
ret
appi
ngLaw;Admi
ssi
bil
i
tyofEvi
dence
Tr
ial
a. Consti
tut
ionalprovisi
onsontheri
ghttopri
vacy
-TheRulesofEvi
denceandprocedureshall
beappli
ed
andcommuni cati
onandcor r
espondenceand
l
iberal
l
yandwhenevertheyarepract
icabl
einimpeachment
theadmissibi
l
ityofevidencei
nviol
ati
onofsuch
Tri
alCases(Ar
tVIoftheRul
esofImpeachmentTrial
inthe
ri
ght
Senate)
b. Actspuni
shedunderAnt
i-wi
ret
appi
ngl
aw(
RA
20.Appl
icati
onoftheRulesofCourti
ncasesofCi
vi
l
4200)
For
feit
ure,Asset
sPreser
vati
on,andFreezi
ngof
 c. Penal
tyi
mposabl
eforcommi
ssi
onofpr
ohi
bit
ed
act
s

d. I
nstancesofall
owedover
heari
ngof
conversat
ionandi
tsadmi
ssi
bil
i
ty

e. Admissi
bil
it
yoft
heevi
denceundert
heAnt
i-
Wir
etappingLaw

33.HumanSecur
it
esAct
:Admi
ssi
bil
i
tyofevi
dence

a. RuleonSurveil
l
anceofSuspect
sand
I
ntercept
ionandRecordi
ngofCommuni
cat
ions

b. For
mal
appl
i
cat
ionf
orj
udi
ci
alaut
hor
izat
ion

c. Evi
dent
iar
yval
ueofdeposi
tedmat
eri
als

d. Evi
dent
iar
yval
ueofdeposi
tedbankmat
eri
als

34.Rel
evancyandCol
l
ater
alMat
ter
s

35.Doctr
ineofFal
susinUnoFalsusinOmni
bus;Not
absol
uterul
eoflawinourj
uri
sdict
ion

36.Negat
iveevi
dence:Rul
esonAl
i
biandDeni
al

37.Rul
eonRecant
ati
onofTest
imony:
Eff
ect

38.Rul
esonthedef
enseoff
rame-
up:Quant
um of
evi
dencei
nfr
ame-up

39.Fai
lur
et oi
mmedi atel
yrepor
ttheincidentdoesnot
aff
ectthecredibi
l
it
yofthewitness:nottobe
consi
deredaf abri
cat
edcharge

40.Rulesonadmissibi
li
tyofphot
ographi
cvi
deoand
othersi
mil
arevidenceundertherul
eson
envir
onmentalcases

41
.Admi ssi
bil
i
tyofAudi
o,Photographi
c,Video,and
Ephemeralevi
denceundertheelect
ronicevi
dence
rul
e

a. Rul
esonadmissi
bil
i
tyofaudio,phot
ographi
c,
vi
deoandephemeral evi
denceundert
he
el
ect
roni
cevi
dencer ules

b. Rul
esonadmissi
bil
i
tyofephemer
alel
ect
roni
c
communi
cat
ion

42.Doct
ri
neofRel
axedadmi
ssi
bil
i
tyofevi
dencei
nwr
it
ofAmpar
o
CHAPTERI
II a. Theexi
stenceandt
err
it
ori
alext
entofst
ates;

b. Thei
rpol
i
ti
cal
hist
ory;
Rul
e129
c. For
msofgover
nmentandsymbol
sofnat
ional
i
ty;
WHATNEEDNOTBEPROVED
d. Thel awofnat ions-Courtsaremandat oril
yrequired
I
. JUDICIALNOTI
CE-whati
sknown,neednotbe totakej udi
cialnoti
ceoftheLawofNat ionssince
proved thePhi l
i
ppinesi samemberoft heUN,andi ti
s
expresslyprovidedundert heConst i
tut
ionthat,“
The
-i
tmeansnomor ethanthecour
twil
lbri
ngtoit
saidand
Phil
ippinesrenounceswarasani nst
rumentof
considerwi
thoutproofoff
act
s,i
tsknowledgeoft
hose
nati
onal poli
cy,adoptsthegener all
yaccepted
mattersofpubli
cconcernwhichareknownbyallwell
-
pri
nci pl
eofinternati
onall
awaspar tofthelawoft he
i
nformedper sons.(Peopl
evsLoti
s,1982)
l
andandadher estothepol i
cyofpeace,equal it
y,
1. PURPOSEOFJUDI
CIALNOTI
CE: j
ustice,freedom,cooper ati
onandami t
ywi t
hal lt
he
nati
ons.( Sec2,Ar tI
IPhilConst
i)

e. Theadmiral
tyandmar
it
imecour
tsoft
hewor
ldand
a. Taki
ngtheplaceofpr
oofi
nconnect
ionwi
tht
he thei
rseal
s;
i
ssueinthecase;
f
. Thepol
it
ical
const
it
uti
onandhi
stor
yoft
he
b. Toabbr
evi
atet
hepr
oceedi
ngs. Phi
li
ppi
nes;

g. Theoff
ici
alact
soflegi
sl
ature,execut
iveandj
udi
ci
al
depar
tmentsofthePhi
li
ppines;
2. REQUI
SITES:
h. Thelawsofnature-i
nvolvi
ngthephysi
calsci
ences,
specif
ical
l
ybi
ology,i
ncludethest
ruct
ural
make- up
a. I
tmustbeofgener
alorcommonknowl
edge; andcomposit
ionofli
vingthi
ngssuchashuman
beings.
b. I
tmustbewell
andauthor
it
ati
vel
yset
tl
ed,and
doubt
ful
anduncer
tai
n; -nRi
I coRommel At
ienzavsBoardofMedici
ne,t
hecour t
hel
dthatEdi
tha’
ski
dneysatthet
imeofheroperat
ion,as
c. I
tmustbeknowntobewit
hint
hel
i
mit
soft
he
wit
hmosthumanbei ngs,wer
einthei
rpr
operanatomical
j
uri
sdi
cti
onoft
hecour
t.
posi
ti
ons.

i
. Themeasur
eoft
ime,and
3. PRI
NCI
PLESONWHI
CHI
TISBASED
j
. Thegeogr
aphi
cal
divi
si
ons.

a. Convenience-consider
ingthatpart
ieswil
lbe
OTHERMATTERSTHATTHECOURTSHOULDTAKE
rel
ievedofi
tsdutytopresentproofonfactswhi
chi
s
JUDI
CIALNOTI
CEOFMANDATORILY:
alr
eadyjudi
cial
l
yknownt ot
hejudge;
a. Amendmentt
otheRul
esofCour
t;
b. Expedi
ency-consi
der i
ngt
hatt
rialwi
ll
bemor e
speedyandexpedit
ioussi
ncefact
salreadyknown b. Decisi
onsoft heSC-I nSecretaryofNat ional
tothej
udgerequi
resnomor epresent
ationofpr
oof. DefensevsMani la,whichassessedt heaccountof
Manalotobecandi dandfort
hrightnar r
ativeofhi
s,
andhisbrotherReynaldo’sabduct i
onbyt hemil
it
ary
4. WHENI
SJ.
N.MANDATORY i
n2006,t hereisnocompel li
ngr easonf ortheCourt
,
i
nthepr esentcase,todist
urbitsappr eciati
oni
n
Sec.1Rul
e129 Manalo’stest
imony

JUDI
CIALNOTI
CE,WHENMANDATORY c. Of
fi
cial
act
sordecl
arat
ionoft
hePr
esi
dent
;

Acourtshal
lt
akej
udi
ci
alnot
ice,wi
thouti
ntr
oduct
ionof d. Banki
ngpr
act
ices;
evi
dence:
e. Fi
nanci
alst
atusoft
hegover
nment
;
 f
. Power
soft
hepr
esi
dent
; ORDI
NANCES

g. Cour
tRecor
ds. 1. I
ncaseofMet ropoli
tanTrialCourt
s,Munici
palTri
al
Court
,Munici
pal Cir
cuitTri
alCourt
s,theyar
e
COURTSMAYNOTTAKEJUDI
CIALNOTI
CEOF
mandatori
l
yrequiredtotakeJNoft helawsandthe
DOCUMENTS
or
dinancesoft
heci tyormuni ci
pal
it
ywheretheysit
.
-Thedocumentsarenotamongt hematterswhichthel
aw
2. I
ncaseofRegionalTr
ial
Court
s,t
heyare
mandator
il
yrequir
estheCourtt
ot akej
udici
alnoti
ceof,
mandat
ori
l
yrequir
edtotakeJNofthel
awsoft
he
wit
houtanyint
roduct
ionofevi
dence.
l
and.

5. WHENI
SJ.
N.DI
SCRETI
ONARY
GR:Incaseofordi
nances,Regional
Tri
alCour
tsar
e
Sec2.Rul
e129 notmandator
il
yrequi
redtotakeJN.

JUDI
CIALNOTI
CE,WHENDI
SCRETI
ONARY XPN:

Acour
tmayt
akej
udi
cial
not
iceofmat
ter
s: 1
. Wheni
tisr
equi
redbyl
aworbyt
hest
atut
e;

a. whi
char
eofpubl
i
cknowl
edge,or 2. I
ncaseofappeal
invol
vi
ngt
heor
dinance;

b. ar
ecapabl
etounquest
ionabl
edemonst
rat
ion,or 3. I
ncaseofi ssueoff
actswhi
char eof
unquest
ionabledemonst
rat
ion.
c. oughttobeknownt oj
udgesbecauseoft
hei
r
j
udici
alfunct
ions.

REQUI
REMENTSFORTHECOURTSTOTAKEJ.
NOF
FOREI
GNLAWS:

a. Thei
ssuei
nvol
vedi
soneoff
actandnotofl
aw;and
6. WHENI
SHEARI
NGNECESSARYI
NJ.
N.
b. Thef
orei
gnl
awmustbepr
ovedl
i
keanyot
herf
act
.
Sec.3,Rul
e129
XPN:
JUDI
CIALNOTI
CE,WHENHEARI
NGNECESSARY
a. Whenthecour
thasact
ual
knowl
edgeoft
hef
orei
gn
Dur
ingt
het
ri
al,t
hecour
t:
l
aws;
1
. Oni
tsowni
nit
iat
ive,or
b. Whenthecour
thasal
readyrul
eduponi
nacase
i
nvol
vi
ngthesai
dfor
eignlaw. 2. Onr
equestofapar
ty

-
Likeanyot
herf
act
s,t
heymustbeal
l
egedandpr
oved. -mayannouncei
tsi
ntent
iont
otakeJNofanymat
terand
al
lowt
heparti
est
obehear dt
hereon.
-InMer opeEnr i
quexVdadeCat al
anvsLouel l
aA.Catal
an
Lee,thecour thel
dt hat
,Austr
ali
anmar it
allawsar enot Aft
erthet
ri
alandbef
orej
udgmentoronappeal
,thepr
oper
amongt hosemat t
ersthatj
udgesoughtt oknowbyr eason court
:
oftheiroffi
cialfuncti
on.Thepowerofj udicialnot
icemustbe
1
. oni
tsowni
nit
iat
ive,or
exerci
sedwi thcaut i
on,andever yreasonabl edoubtupon
thesubjectshoul dber esol
vedinthenegat ive. 2. Onr
equestofapar
ty

DOCTRI
NEOF“ PRESUMED-I
DENTI
TYAPPROACH”OR -maytakeJNofanymatterandal
l
owthepar
ti
estobehear
d
PROCESSUALPRESUMPTION” ther
eonifsuchmat
teri
sdecisi
veofamat
eri
ali
ssuei
nthe
case.
-Wher et
heforei
gnlawisnotpleadedor,evenifpleaded,i
s
notproved,t
hepreumpti
onisthatfor
eignlawisthesameas
ours.(
ATCIOverseasCorpor
ati
on,Amal i
aG.Ikdaland
Minist
ryofPubl
icHeal
th-Kuwai
tvsMa.Josef aEchin,2010) I
I. JUDI
CIALADMI
SSI
ONS
ARECOURTSMANDATORI
LYREQUI
REDTOTAKE
JUDI
CIALNOTI
CEOFTHELAWSANDMUNICI
PAL
 1. JUDI
CIALADMI
SSI
ONS REPEATSTHESAMEI
NCOURT

Sec.4,Rul
e129 -Whi l
eitist
ruethatstat
ement smadebyaconspi rator
againstaco-conspi r
atorareadmi ssi
bleonlywhenmade
Judi
cial
Admi
ssi
on-i
sanadmi
ssi
on:
duri
ngt heexist
enceoft heconspiracy,i
fthedeclarant
a. Ver
bal
,or repeatsthestat
ementi ncourt,hi
sextrajudi
cial
confessi
on
becomesaj udi
cial
admi ssi
on,maki ngthetesti
mony
b. Wr
it
ten admi ssi
bleastobothconspirator
s.

-madebythepart
yincour
seofthepr
oceedi
ngsoft
he MEREDENIALFORLACKOFKNOWLEDGEI S
samecase,doesnotr
equi
repr
oof. I
NSUFFI
CIENT:ADMI
SSI
ONI NTHEANSWERCANONLY
BECONTRADICTEDBYPALPABLEMI
STAKE
-
Theadmi
ssi
onmaybecont
radi
ctedonl
yby:
-
Aperson’
sdeni
alf
orlackofknowl
edgeofthi
ngsthatby
a. Showi
ngt
hati
twasmadet
hroughpal
pabl
emi
stake,
t
hei
rnat
ureheoughtt
oknowi snotanaccept
abl
edeni al
.
or
-Anadmi ssi
onintheansweranddueexecuti
onofthe
b. Thatnosuchadmi
ssi
onwasmade.
plai
nti
ff
’sacti
onabledocument
,canonl
ybecont r
adict
edby
showingthatdefendantmadesuchadmissi
onthr
ough
palpabl
emi st
ake.
REQUI
SITESFORAVALI
DJUDI
CIALADMI
SSI
ON:
DI
STINCTI
ONSBETWEENADMI
TTEDFACTSAND
a. Def
ini
te
PROPOSEDFACTSTOBEADMI
TTED
b. Cer
tai
n
-TheRoChanor ul
et hattreatst
hestat
ement sfoundunder
c. Unequi
vocal theheadingProposedEvi denceasadmi ssi
onsbindi
ngon
thepart
y-onthecont rary,theRoChasevendi sti
ngui
shed
-
Other
wise,t
hedi
sput
edf
actwi
l
lnotbeset
tl
ed. betweenadmittedfactsandf actspr
oposedt obeadmitt
ed
duri
ngthestageofpr e-t
r i
al.
PURPOSEOFADMISSI
ON:ITCANNOTBECONTRADI CTED
EXCEPTTHORUGHPALPABLEMISTAKE:LI
BERALI
TYIN ALLEGATI
ONSOFTHEPLAI
NTI
FFI
NTHECOMPLAI
NTARE
APPLI
CATIONOFTHERULES DEEMEDADMISSI
ONS

-Ever
yal
legedadmissi
onistakenasanenti
retyoft
hefact -Aj udici
aladmissi
onisonesomadei npleadi
ngsfi
ledorin
whichmakesfort
heonesi dewit
hthequal
if
icati
onswhi
ch thepr ogressofatri
alast
odispensewiththei
ntr
oducti
onof
l
imit
,modif
yordestr
oyitseff
ectontheot
herside. evidenceot her
wisenecessar
ytodispensewit
hsomer ules
ofpr acti
cenecessarytobeobservedandcompliedwit
h.
-Thereasonforthi
sis,wher
epartofastatementofaparty
i
susedagai nsthi
m asanadmissi
on,t
hecour tshoul
dweigh -Cor
respondi
ngly,f
actsall
egedi
nthecompl
aintar
edeemed
anyotherporti
onconnectedwi
ththestat
ement ,whi
chtends admissi
onsoftheplai
nti
ffandbi
ndi
nguponhi
m.
toneutr
ali
zeorexplai
ntheport
ionwhichisagainstt
he
i
nterest
. -Theall
egat
ions,st
atement
soradmissi
onscontai
nedi
na
pleadi
ngareconclusi
veasagai
nstt
hepleader
.
-Inotherwords,whil
etheadmissi
oni
sadmi ssibl
ein
evidence,i
tspr
obativeval
ueistobedeterminedfrom t
he DISTI
NCTIONSBETWEENJUDI
CIALADMI
SSI
ONAND
whol est
atementandothersi
nti
matel
yrelat
edorconnect ed JUDICIALCONFESSI
ON
therewit
hasani nt
egrat
edunit
.
JUDI
CIALADMI
SSI
ON JUDI
CIALCONFESSI
ON
-Alt
houghact
sorfactsadmit
teddonotr equi
reproofand
-isanadmi ssi
on,ver
balor -acknowl
edgementof
cannotbecontr
adi
cted,however,evidenceali
undecanbe
wr i
tt
en,madebyapar t
yin one’sgui
l
tint
hesamecase
present
edtoshowthattheadmissionwasmadet hrough
thecourseofthe
palpabl
emist
ake.
proceedingsinthesame
-Therulei
sal
waysinfavorofl
iberal
i
tyinconst
ruct
ionof case
pleadi
ngssot
hatther
eal matt
erindisput
emaybe
Doesnotr
esul
ti
nli
abi
l
it
y Connot
esadmi
ssi
onof
submitt
edtot
hejudgmentofthecour t
.
one’
sli
abi
l
it
y
EXTRAJUDI
CIALCONFESSI
ONMADEBYACO-
Maybeexpr
essori
mpl
i
ed I
sal
waysexpr
essort
aci
t
CONSPIRATORBECOMESJUDI
CIALADMI
SSI
ONI
FHE
 I
smor eofabroaderscope I
sonlyl
imit
edt
othe al
sotoinferencest
hatmaybefai
rl
ydeducedf
rom t
hem.
whichincl
udesj
udi
cial conf
essi
onofaper
son (Muni
cipali
tyofHagonoyBul
acanetal
vsHonSimeon
confessi
on Dumdum)

Maybemadebyanypar
ty Canonlybemadebythe 3. I
MPLIEDADMISSI
ONI
NCASEOFAREQUEST
accusedinacr
imi
nal FORADMISSI
ONBYADVERSEPARTYUNDER
proceedi
ng RULE26

Sec.2Rul
e26oft
he1997Rul
esofCi
vi
lPr
ocedur
e

DISTI
NCTIONSBETWEENJUDI
CIALADMI
SSI
ONAND -pr
ovi
desfort
her
uleontheimpl
iedadmissi
onbyadver
se
EXTRA-JUDI
CIALADMI
SSI
ON par
tyoft
hegenui
nenessofanydocument.

JUDI
CIALADMI
SSI
ON EXTRA-JUDICI
AL Sec.2Impl
iedAdmi ssi
on-Eachofthemat t
ersofwhi
chan
ADMISSION admissi
oni
srequestedshal
lbedeemedadmi t
tedUNLESS,
wit
hinaper
ioddesignatedi
ntherequest
,thepartywi
l
l:
Anadmissi
onmadei
nthe Anadmissi
onmadei n
samecase anot
hercaseoroutof 1
. Fil
eandser veupont hepar t
yr equest i
ngt he
cour
tadmissi
on admi ssi
onaswor nst atementei t
herdenyi ng
specifi
call
ythemat t
er sofwhi chanadmi ssi
onis
Neednotbepr ovenbyt he Needst
obeallegedand requestedorset ti
ngf orthindet ailthereasonswhy
part
ybeingconcl usi
veon pr
ovedl
ikeanyotherf
act. hecannott ruthful
l
yei theradmi tordenyt hose
thepartoftheadmi t
ter, mat t
ers.whichshal lnotbel esst han1 5daysaf t
er
UNLESSi twasmade servi
cet hereof,orwit hi
nsuchf urtherti
meast he
thr
oughpal pablemistake courtmayal l
owonmot ion,thepar t
ytowhom t he
orwhent hereisnosuch requestisdirectedfi
lesandser vesupont hepart
y.
admissi
onmade
2. Wit
hinsuchf
urt
hert
imeast
hecour
tmayal
l
owon
moti
on.

I
NSTANCESWEREJUDI
CIALADMI
SSI
ONSCANBEMADE: Objecti
onstoanyr equestforadmissi
onshallbe
submittedtot hecourtbythepartyrequest
edwi thi
nthe
a. Admi
ssi
onsmadei
nthepl
eadi
ngs
peri
odf orandpr iort
ot hefi
l
ingofhissworns t
atementas
b. Admi
ssi
onsmadedur
ingpr
e-t
ri
alconf
erence; contempl at
edi ntheprecedingparagraphandhis
compl i
ancet herewit
hshallbedeferredunt
ilsuchobject
ions
c. Admi
ssi
onsmadei
nmot
ionsf
il
edbef
oret
hecour
t;
areresolved,whi chresol
uti
onshallbemadeasear l
yas
d. Admissi
onsmadebyt
hewi
tnessont
hewi
tness practi
cable.
st
and;

e. Admi
ssi
onsmadei
nanswert
owr
it
tenr
equestf
or
WHATI
SAN“
IMPLI
EDADMI
SSI
ONRULE”
admi
ssi
on;
-Eachmatt
ermustbedeni
edspeci
fi
cal
lyunderoathset
ti
ng
f
. Admissi
onsmadeint
heansweri
nthewr
it
ten
for
thindet
ail
ther
easonwhyhecannottr
uthf
ull
yadmitor
i
nter
rogator
ies;
deny.
g. Admi
ssi
onsmadei
nopencour
tdur
ingt
ri
al
-thesilenceofdef endantonthepl ai
nti
ff
’srequestfor
h. Admi
ssi
onont
est
imoni
es,deposi
ti
on,andaf
fi
davi
ts. admi ssionamount stoanimpliedaccept anceofthef act
s
setfortht her
einwit
htheeffectthatpl
ainti
ff
’scl
aim stood
i
. Agr
eementoff
act
sbyt
hepar
ti
es. undisput ed.(ManzanovsDespabi l
aderas,2004)

2. COVERAGEOFHYPOTHETI
CALADMI
SSI
ONRULE
UNDERRULE16
LI
MITATI
ONSONTHE“
IMPLI
EDADMI
SSI
ONRULE”
-Whenamoti
ont odismi
ssi
sfi
led,t
hemater
ial
all
egat
ions
oft
hecompl
aintaredeemedtobehypot
heti
cal
lyadmitt
ed. -Theredundantandunnecessar i
l
yvexat i
ousnatureof
peti
ti
oner’
srequestforadmissi
onr enderedi
tineff
ectual
,
-
Thishypothet
icaladmissi
on,extendsnotonl
yfrom t
he fut
il
e,andirr
elevantsoastoproscribetheoperati
onofthe
r
elevantandmat er
ial
factswell
pleadedinthecomplai
nt,but i
mpl i
edadmi ssi
onrulei
nSect i
on2,Rule26oft heRoC.
-Therebeingnoimpl
iedadmi ssi
onatt
ributabl
eto Sec2Rul
e11
6pr
ovi
dest
hat
:
respondent’
sfai
l
uretorespond,theargumentthata
Sec2.Pl
eaofgui
l
tyt
oal
esserof
fense-
preli
minar
yhearingi
simperativel
osesitspoint
.(Li
mosvs
SpouseOdones,201 0) Atthearraignment ,t
heaccusedwi ththeconsentoft
he
off
endedpar t
yandt heprosecutor
,maybeal lowedbythe
REMEDYOFTHEPERSONMAKI
NGANI
MPLI
ED
tr
ailcour
ttopl eadguil
tytoalesseroff
ensewhi chi
s
ADMISSI
ON
necessari
lyincludedintheoff
ensechar ged.
-
Mot
iont
ober
eli
evedofI
mpl
i
edAdmi
ssi
on
Afterarr
aignmentbutbef oretri
al,t
heaccusedmaysti
l
lbe
4. ADMISSI
ONSI
NCASEOFJUDGMENTONTHE al
lowedt opleadguilt
ytosaidlesserof
fenseaft
er
PLEADI
NGS withdr
awinghi spleaofnotguil
ty.Noamendmentofthe
compl ai
ntorinfor
mationisnecessary.
-Amot i
onforjudgmentont hepleadingsadmitsthetrut
hof
allt
hemat erial
andrelevantal
legati
onsoftheopposi ngpart
y
andt hejudgmentmustr estonthoseal l
egat
ionstaken
NATUREOFTHEPLEAOFGUI
LTYTOALESSEROFFENSE
togetherwithsuchotherall
egati
onsasar eadmi t
tedinthe
BYTHEACCUSED
pleadings.
-I
ncaset heaccusedpl eadsguil
tyt
oalesserof
fense,iti
s
-I
tisproperwhenananswerfai
l
stot
enderanissue,or
equi
valentt
oaj udi
cialadmissi
onofanoff
enseandal l
the
otherwiseadmit
sthemat
eri
alal
l
egat
ionsoft
headverse
i
ngredient
snecessaril
yincl
udedintheof
fensecharged
party’
spleadi
ng.
cont
ainedintheformerinformati
on.
-However ,wheni tappearsthatnotallt
hemat eri
al
REQUISI
TESINCASETHEACCUSEDWOULDPLEADTOA
all
egati
onsoft hecompl ai
ntwer eadmi t
tedintheanswerfor
LESSEROFFENSE
someoft hem wer eeitherdeniedordisputed,andthe
defendanthassetupcer t
ainspecialdefenseswhich,i
f Duri
ngt
hearrai
gnment ,t
hecour tmayall
owtheaccusedto
proven,wouldhavet heef f
ectofnul l
i
fyi
ngplaint
if
f’
smain makeapleatoalesseroff
ensewhi chi
snecessar
il
yincl
uded
causeofact i
on,judgmentont hepl eadi
ngscannotbe i
ntheof
fensecharged,subjectt
othefol
lowi
ngrul
es:
rendered.(Municipal
it
yofTiwi vsAntonioB.Betit
o)
a. Thepleatoal esserof
fensemustbemadebythe
5. I
MPLIEDJUDI
CIALADMISSI
ONINCASEOF accusedwi t
htheconsentoftheoff
endedpar
tyand
OFFEROFCOMPROMI SEINCRI
MINALCASES theprosecutor,and

Sec.27,Rule130oftheRoCpr
ovi
def
ort
her
ulesonof
ferof b. Aft
erarraignmentbutbeforetr
ial,t
heaccusedmay
compromise.I
tstat
esthat
— st
il
lbeallowedtopleadguil
tytosaidlesserof
fens
e
aft
erwithdrawi
nghispleaofnotgui l
ty.No
Sec.27.Of
ferofcompr
omi
senotadmi
ssi
ble-
amendmentoft hecompl ai
ntorinfor
mat i
onis
Xxx necessary.

I
ncr i
mi nalcases,exceptthoseinvolvingquasi
-of
fenses
(cr
iminal negli
gence)orthoseallowedbyl awtobe
7. JUDICI
ALADMI
SSI
ONINCASEOFPLEAOF
compr omi sed,anofferofcompr omi sebytheaccusedmay
GUILTYTOACAPI
TALOFFENSE
berecei vedinevidenceasani mpliedadmi ssi
onofguil
t.
Thecourti
srequiredtomakeani
nquir
yonthevolunt
ari
ness
EFFECTOFANOFFEROFCOMPROMI
SEI
NCRI
MINAL
andful
lcompr ehensi
onoft
hepel
aoftheaccusedtoa
CASES
capi
tal
offense.Sec3,Rul
e1 1
6oftheRoCspecif
ical
l
y
-mayber
ecei
vedi
nevi
denceasani
mpl
i
edadmi
ssi
onof mandates:
gui
l
t
Sec.3.PLEAOFGUI
LTYTOACAPI
TALOFFENSE;
RECEPTIONOFEVI
DENCE

6. JUDICI
ALADMISSI
ONINCASEOFPLEAOF Whent
heaccusedpl
eadsgui
l
tyt
oacapi
tal
off
ense,
GUILTYTOALESSEROFFENSE
a. thecourtshal
lconductasearchi
nginqui
ryi
ntot
he
Duri
ngthearraignment,t
heaccusedwi
tht
heconsentoft
he volunt
ari
nessandfullcomprehensi
onofthe
pr
osecutorandt heof
fendedpar
tymaybeall
owedtomake consequencesofhispleaand
apleat
oal esseroff
ense.
 b. shal
lrequi
ret
heprosecut
iont
oprovehi
sgui
l
tand
thepreci
sedegr
eeofculpabi
l
it
y.

c. Theaccusedmaypr
esentevi
dencei
nhi
sbehal
f.

8. JUDICI
ALADMISSI
ONINCASETHEACCUSED
PLEADSGUILTYTOANON-CAPI
TALOFFENSE

I
ncaset heaccusedpl
eadsguil
tytoanon- capitalof
fense
t
hecourtwil
lrecei
veevi
denceforthedeter
mi nati
onofthe
penal
ti
estobeimposed.Sec.4,Rule11
6pr ovidesthat:

Sec.4PLEAOFGUI
LTYTONON- CAPI
TALOFFENSE;
RECEPTI
ONOFEVIDENCE,DI
SCRETI
ONARY

Whent heaccusedpl
eadsgui
l
tyt
oanon-capi
tal
offense,t
he
courtmayrecei
veevi
dencefr
om t
hepar
ti
estodetermine
thepenal
tytobeimposed.

-Thecourti
sdutyboundtorecei
veevi
dencef
rom t
he
part
iesf
orthedeter
minat
ionofthepenal
ty

FACTORSTOBECONSIDEREDBYTHECOURTI
NTHE
EXERCI
SEOFDISCRETI
ONINCASEOFPLEAOFGUI
LTY

-Intheexerci
seofdi scr
etionoft
hejudge,heshouldtake
i
ntoconsiderati
ont hegravit
yoftheoff
ensechargedandt he
probabil
i
tythattheaccuseddi dnotact
uall
yunderst
andfully
t
hemeani ngofhispleaandt heconsequencet
hereof.
(PeoplevsAcost a,PeoplevsDeMesa)
CHAPTERI
V REQUI
SITESFORTHEADMI
SSI
BILI
TYOFOBJECT
EVI
DENCE
RULE130 1
. I
tmustber
elevant
;

RULESOFADMI
SSI
BILI
TY 2. I
tmustbeaut
hent
icat
ed;

I
. BASI
CCONCEPTSONCLASSESOF 3. I
tmustbei
dent
if
iedbyacompet
entwi
tness;
EVI
DENCE
4. I
tmustbef
ormal
l
yof
fer
ed.
A. THREEMAJORKI
NDSOFEVI
DENCE

1. THREEMAJORKI
NDSOFEVI
DENCEUNDERTHE
RULES
LI
MITATI
ONSONTHEADMISSI
ONOFOBJECTORREAL
a. Obj ectorReal evi
denceor“Autopti
c
EVI
DENCEANDEXCEPTI
ONS
Prof erence”(evi
denceofone’ssenses)ist
he
kindofevi dencewhichisdir
ectl
yaddressedto GR:Obj
ectorr
ealevi
dencemayber ef
usedadmi
tt
anceby
thesens eofthecourtandconsi
stsoft
angibl
e t
hecour
tonthefol
lowi
nggrounds:
thingsexhibit
ed,viewedorexaminedinopen
cour t. 1
. Whent heobj
ectevidencei
srepul
si
veori
ts
exhi
bit
ioni
scontrar
ytopubli
cpoli
cy,mor
als,or
b. Document ar
yevidenceisanevi dencewhich senseofdecency;
consistofwr
it
ingoranymat erialcontai
ning
l
etter
s,words,numbers,fi
gures,symbol s,or 2. Whenitwoul
dresultonl
yindel
ays,i
nconveni
ence,
othermodesofwr i
tt
enexpr essionoffer
edas orwoul
dentai
lunnecessar
yexpenses;
proofofthei
rcont
ents;and
3. Wheniti
sconf
usingormisl
eadi
ng(ex:whenit
s
c. Test
imoni
alevi
denceor“Vivavoceevidence” pur
poseist
oprovethef
ormercondit
ionoft
he
i
sanoralevi
dencegivenbythewitnessonthe obj
ect
;
wit
nessst
andorinanyproceeding
4. Whent her
eisat est
imoni
alordocument
ary
I
I. OBJECTEVI
DENCE evi
dencealreadypresent
edwhichalr
eady
descr
ibedtheobject
A. OBJECT(
REAL)EVI
DENCE
XPNS:
Sec.1Rul
e130.Obj
ectasevi
dence
1
. Whentheobjectevi
dencei
snecessar
yint
he
-Obj
ect
sasevidencear ethoseaddr essedt
ot hesenseof i
nter
estofj
usti
ce;
t
hecourt
.Whenanobj ecti
srelevanttothefacti
nissue,i
t
maybeexhi
bit
edt o,examinedorvi ewedbyt hecourt. 2. Whentheimmoral
objecti
stheverybasi
soft
he
pr
osecut
ionoft
hecivi
lorcr
imi
nalcase.
SCOPEOFOBJECT/
REALEVI
DENCE:
I
NSTANCESWHEREADOCUMENTI
SCONSI
DEREDAS
1
. Senseofvi
si
on OBJECTORREALEVI
DENCE

2. Senseofhear
ing(
audi
tor
y) Adocumentmaybeconsi
der
edasanobjectorr
eal
evi
dencewheni
tspur
posei
sbasedonthef
oll
owi
ng:(ENDA)
3. Senseoft
ouch(
tact
il
e)
1
. Wheni tt
endst
oprovetheexi
stenceornon-
4. Senseoft
ast
e(gus
tat
ory)
;and
exi
stenceofadocument;
5. Senseofsmel
l(ol
fact
ory)
2. Whenthepur
poseist
oprovethenat
ureoft
he
EFFECTSIFTHEOBJECTEVI
DENCEI
SRELEVANTTOTHE handwr
it
ingi
nthedocument
;
FACTINISSUE:
3. Whenthei
ntent
ionoft
hepart
yist
odet
ermi
net
he
1
. Maybeexhi
bit
ed; ageoft
hepaperormater
ial
used;

2. Exami
ned;or 4. Wheni
tspur
poseistoprovet
heal
terat
ions,
bl
emi
shesorfor
geryinadocument.
3. Vi
ewedbyt
hecour
t.
 thoughthepr
oceduralr
equirementsprovi
dedfori
nSec21
ofRA91 65wasnotfai
thful
l
yobser ved,t
hegui
ltofthe
B. RULESONCHAINOFCUSTODYONDRUGSAS
accusedwil
lnotbeaff
ected( Peopl
evsManlangit
,2011)
OBJECTEVI
DENCE
4. WHENTOESTABLI
SHCHAI
NOFCUSTODY
1. CHAI NOFCUSTODYRULE-i sthedul yrecorded
authorizedmovement sandcust odyofsei zeddrugs -fr
om theti
met hesei
zeddrugswer
econf i
scat
edand
orcont rol
ledchemi calsorpl antsour cesof eventual
lymarkedunti
lt
hesameispresent
edduri
ngtr
ial
danger ousofdanger ousdr ugsorl aborat
ory (PeoplevsSanti
ago,2011)
equipmentofeachst age,from t het i
meof
5. FAI
LURETOFOLLOW THEPROPERPROCEDURE
seizure/confi
scati
ont or eceiptint heforensic
FORTHECUSTODYOFCONFI SCTAEDDRUGS
l
abor atorytosafekeepi ngtopr esentati
onincourt
WOULDRESULTINACQUITTAL
fordest r
ucti
on.(Peopl evsAl ivio,2011)
-evenpriort
othepassageofRA9165,showsthatt
heSC
-
suchr ecordofmovement
sandcust
odyofsei
zed
didnothesit
atet
ostri
kedownconvi
cti
onsforf
ail
ureto
i
tem shal
lincl
udet
he:
fol
lowtheproperprocedur
efort
hecust
odyofconfiscat
ed
a. i
denti
tyandsi
gnat
ureofthepersonwho dangerousdrugs.
hel
dtemporar
ycustodyoftheseizedi
tem,
-Pr
iort
oRA91 65,t
heSCappli
edtheprocedurerequi
redby
b. thedateandti
mewhensucht r
ansf
erof DangerousDr
ugsBoardRegul
ati
onNo.3,S.of1 979,
custodyweremadeinthecour
seof amendingBoardRegul
ati
onNo.7,Ser
iesof1974.
safekeepi
nganduseincour
tasevi
dence,
-Non- compliancewiththeexpr essr equi
rementsunder
and
paragraph1Sect i
on21,Ar t
icleIIofRA91 65justi
fi
edwher e
c. t
hef
inal
disposi
ti
on theprosecutionrecognizedt hepr ocedurall
apses,and
theref
oreexpl ai
nedtheci t
edj usti
fi
ablegrounds,,andwhen
-whil
eaper fectchai
nofcust odyisalmostal
ways
theprosecutionestabl
ishedt hattheintegri
tyandevident
iary
i
mpossibletoachi eve,anunbrokenchainbecomes
valueoftheevi denceseizedhasbeenpr eser
ved.(Peopl
evs
i
ndispensableandessent i
ali
nthepr osecuti
onofdrug
Navarette,2011)
casesowi ngtoit
ssusceptibi
l
it
yt oalt
erati
on,tamperi
ng,
contaminati
onandevensubst itut
ionandexchange. 6. REQUI
REMENTSFORTHEMARKI
NGOFSEI
ZED
Hence,ever yl
inkmustbeaccount edfor. DRUGS

-t
hepresumpt ionofr egul ar i
tyinthe -t
hechainofcust
odyrul
erequi
rest
hatt
hemar
kingoft
he
performanceofof fi
cialdutyobt ai
nsonl ywher enot hi
ng sei
zedi
temsshouldbedone:
i
nt her ecor dsi
ssuggest i
veoft hef actt hatthel aw
a. i
nthepr
esenceoft
heappr
ehendedvi
olat
orand
enforcer sinvol
veddevi at
edf rom thest andar dconduct
ofofficialdutyasprovidedf orinthel aw-ot herwise,t
he b. i
mmediat
elyuponconf
iscat
iontoensur
ethatt
hey
offi
cialacti nquest
ionisirr
egul aroni tsf ace,anadver se ar
etheonesoff
eredi
nevidence.
presumpt i
onar i
sesasamat terofcour se.( Peoplevs
Labag,2011) -whi
let
her ul
eall
owsthemar kingofevi
dencetobedonei
n
t
henearestpoli
cestat
ion,t
hiscontempl
atesacaseof
2. PURPOSEANDFUNCTI
ONOFTHECHAI
N warr
ant
lesssearchesandsei zur
es.
CUSTODYREQUI
REMENT
-Fai
luret
ocompl ywi
ththemarki
ngofevidencei
mmediat
ely
-ensuri
ngthatt
heintegrit
yandevident
iar
yvalueofthe aft
erconfiscat
ionconst
it
utesafi
rstgapi
nthechai
nof
sei
zeditemsarepr eserved,somuchsothatunnecessar
y custody.
doubtsastotheidenti
tyoftheevi
denceareremoved
-Non- compli
ancewi ththeprescri
bedpr oceduresdoesnot
-t
heunbr okenl
inki
nt hechainofcustodyalsoprecludedthe necessaril
yresul
ti
nt heconclusionthattheidenti
tyoft
he
possi
bil
it
ythataper
son,noti nthechain,evergained seizeddrugshasbeencompr omisedsot hatanacquit
tal
possessi
onoftheseizedevidence(PeoplevsAl i
vio,2011) shouldfoll
owaslongast heprosecutioncandemonst r
ate
thattheint
egri
tyandevidenti
ar yvalueoftheevidence
3. UNBROKENCHAI
NOFCUSTODYI
NDRUGCASES
seizedhasbeenpr eserved(Peopl evsAlcuizar
,2011)
I
SMANDATORY
7. MANDATORYMARKI
NGOFTHESEI
ZED
-
asl
ongast
hechai
nofcust
odyr
emai
nsunbr
oken,even
EVI
DENCE
-Mar ki
ngaftersei
zur
eist hestart
ingpointint
hecustodi
al st
epsment
i Peopl
oned( evsPal
l
aya,2011)
l
ink,thusi
tisvit
alt
hatt
hesei zedcontrabandisimmediat
ely
11.WHENTOESTABLI
SHTHECHAI
NOFCUSTODY
mar kedbecausesucceedinghandl er
soft hespeci
menwi l
l
OFEVI
DENCE
uset hemarkingsasr
eference( Peopl
evsCapuno,2011)
-fr
om theti
met hesei
zeddrugswer
econf i
scat
edand
8. EFFECTOFFAI
LURETOMAKEANI MMEDI
ATE
eventual
lymarkedunti
lt
hesameispresent
edduri
ngtr
ial
MARKINGOFTHESEIZEDEVI
DENCE
(PeoplevsSanti
ago,2011)
-wil
lnotautomati
call
yimpairtheintegri
tyofchainofcustody
12.EFFECTSOFNON-
COMPLI
ANCEWI
THSEC21OF
aslongast hei
ntegri
tyandtheevi dent
iaryvalueofthe
RA9165
sei
zeditemshavebeenpr eserved,asthesewoul dbe
uti
l
izedinthedeterminat
ionoft heguil
torinnocenceofthe
accused.(Peopl
evsMor al
es,2011)
a. Non- compliancewi
thSecti
on21,RA91 65doesnot
9. RULEONTHETESTI
MONYOFTHECHAI
NOF renderanaccused’sarr
esti
ll
egalorit
ems
CUSTODY seized/confi
scat
edfr
om himinadmissi
bl Peopl
e( evs
DelaCr uz,2011)
-test
imonyaboutaperf
ectchaini
snotal
waysthestandar
d
asiti
salmostal
waysimpossibl
etoobt
ainanunbrokenchain. b. TheSCuphel dt
heconvi cti
onoftheaccusedbyr uli
ng
(PeoplevsQui
amanlon,2011) thatt
hefai
l
ureoft hepoli
cement omakeaphysi cal
i
nventor
yandphot ographofthetwopl asti
ccont
aining
shabusubj
ectofthecasedonotr endertheconf
iscated
i
temsinadmissi
bleinevidence.

10.WITNESSESWHOWI
LLESTABLI
SHTHE  Likewi
se,thef ai
lureofthepolicement omark
CUSTODIALLI
NK thetwoplasticsachetscontainingshabuatthe
placeofarrestdoesnotr endert heconfi
scat
ed
-t
hemar ki
ngofthecaptur
edi
temsimmediat
elyaft
erthey
i
temsinadmi ssibleinevi
dence.
aresei
zedfrom t
heaccusedi
sthest
art
ingpoi
ntinthe
cust
odiall
i
nk c. TheIRRofRA9165pr ovidest
hatt
hephysicali
nventory
oftheseizedi
temsmaybedoneatt henearestpol
ice
 thi
sst
episvi
tal
becausesucceeding
stat
ion,i
fthesamecannotbedoneattheplacewher e
handl
ersoft
hespecimenswil
lusethe
theit
emswer esei
zed.
marki
ngsasref
erence.
 However ,itmustbeemphasi zedt hattheIRR
 Fai
luretoplacesuchmar ki
ngspavest
he
alsopr ovidesthatnon- compl iancewi ththese
wayf orswapping,pl
ant
ingand
requirement sunderjust i
fi
ablegr ounds,asl ong
contaminat
ionoftheevi
dence.
ast heintegri
tyandt heevi dent i
aryvalueoft he
 Theselapsesser
iouslycastdoubtont
he seized/conf i
scatedi
temsar epr oper l
y
authent
ici
tyoft
hecor pusdeli
cti
, preservedbyt heappr ehendingof fi
cer/t
eam,
warrant
ingacqui
ttalonreasonabl
edoubt
. shallnotr endervoidandi nvalidsuchsei zures
andcust odyoversai ditems
GR:Thepoli
cechemistwhoex
ami
nesasei
zedsubs
tance
shoul
dordi
nari
l
ytest
if
ythat
: -Accordi
ngly,non-compl
iancewit
hthepr
ocedureshal
lnot
rendervoi
dandi nval
idt
heseizur
eandcustodyoft
hedrugs
a. Herecei
vedt
hesei
zedart
icl
easmar
ked, onlywhen:
pr
operl
yseal
edandi
ntact
;
i
. At
tendedbyj
ust
if
iabl
egr
ounds
b. Heresealedi
taft
erexami
nat
ionoft
he
cont
ent;andthat i
i
. Theint
egr
it
yandevidenti
aryval
ueoft
hesei
zed
i
temsareproper
lypreser
vedbytheappr
ehendi
ng
c. Heplacedhisownmarki
ngonthesamet
o team
ensur
ethati
tcoul
dnotebtamper
ed
pendi
ngtri
al.  Theremustbepr oofthatt
hese2requir
ement
s
wer emetbeforesuchnon-compli
ancemaybe
XPN:Incasethepart
iesst
ipulatet
odispensewiththe saidtofal
lwi
thint
hescopeoft heprovi
so
at
tendanceofpol
icechemi st
,theyshoul
dsti
pulatethatt
he (PeoplevsDelaCruz,2008)
l
att
erwouldhavetest
ifi
edthathetooktheprecautionar
y
-Thefail
uretoest
abli
sh,t
hroughconvinci
ngproofthatt
he pol
i
ceoffi
ceri
nvolvedi
mmedi
atel
ypl
acei
dent
if
ying
i
ntegri
tyofthesei
zeditemshasbeenadequat el
ypreserved marksonthecover.
thr
oughanunbr okenchainofcustodyisenoughto
b. I
fthedrugsarenoi
nasealedcontai
ner-t
heoff
iceri
sto
engenderreasonabl
edoubtont heguil
tofanaccused.
pl
acethem i
nasealedcontai
ner
,sealt
hecont
ainerand
(Peopl
evsDanzi l
,2010)
puthi
smarkingonthecover.
13.WHENTOMAKEMARKI
NGOFEVI
DENCE
-Inthi
swayt herei
sassur
ancethatt
hedrugswouldreach
-shouldbedoneint
hepr esenceoftheapprehended thecrimelaborat
oryanal
ysti
nthesameconditi
oni
twas
viol
atorandi
mmediatel
yuponconf iscat
iontoensur
ethat seizedfr
om theaccused(Peopl
evsUlep,2011)
theyarethesameit
emst hatent
erthechainandare
18.CHAI
NOFCUSTODYREQUI
REMENTS
eventuall
yof
fer
edasevidence.
-
Ineverypr
osecut
ionf
ori
l
legal
sal
eofdanger
ousdr
ug,what
-warr
antl
esssear
chesandsei
zur
e:doneatt
henear
est
i
scruci
ali
s:
pol
icest
ati
on
a. t
hei
dent
it
yoft
hebuyerandsel
l
er
14.PROMPTMARKI
NGOFTHESEI
ZEDI
TEMSVI
TAL
b. t
heobj
ect
,and
-becausei
tservesasthest
arti
ngpointi
nthecust
odi
all
ink
andsucceedinghandl
ersofthespecimensof
tenuset
he c. i
tsconsi
der
ati
on.
markingasrefer
ence.
d. Thedel
iver
yoft
het
hingsol
d,andt
hepayment
15.WHERETOMAKETHEPHYSI CALI
NVENTORYOF ther
eof
.
THESEI
ZEDDRUGS:EFFECTSOFNON-
COMPLI
ANCE -Thechai
nofcust
odyr
equi
rement
sthatmustbemetar
e
asfol
l
ows:
-TheIRRofRA9165,provi
desthatt
hephysical
invent
oryof
t
hes ei
zeditemsmaybedoneatthenearestpoli
cestat
ion, a. Test
imonythatever
yli
nki
nthechai
n,fr
om t
he
i
fthesamecannotbedoneattheplacewher et
heitems momentitwaspickedupt
otheti
mei ti
sof
fer
edi
n
wereseized. evi
dence;and

 However ,non-compli
ancewi t
hthese b. Witnessesshoul
ddescri
betheprecaut
ionstakent
o
requirement sunderj
ustif
iablegrounds,aslong ensurethatt
herehadbeennochangeint he
ast heintegri
tyandevidenti
aryval ueoft
he condit
ionofthei
tem andnoopport
unit
yfor
seizeditemsar eproperl
ypr eservedshal
lnot someonenoti nthecust
odyofthechai
ntohave
rendervoi dandinval
idthesei zureandcust
ody possessi
onoftheitem.(Mal
i
li
nvsPeople,2011)
ofthedr ugs.
19.RULEONTHEI
MMEDI
ATEPLACI
NGOF
16.EFFECTSOFFAILURETOSTRICTLYCOMPLY MARKI
NGSONTHESEI
ZEDDRUGS
WITHTHEPHYSICALINVENTORYAND
-Sincet
hecustodyandpossessionofthedrugsusual
l
y
PHOTOGRAPHINGOFTHESEI ZEDDRUGS
changefrom t
heti
met heyareseizedt
othet i
metheyare
-
doesnotnecessar
il
yrenderanaccused’
sarr
estil
l
egalor present
edincourt
,iti
sindi
spensablet
hat:
t
hei
temsseizedorconfi
scatedf
rom hi
minadmissi
ble.
a. Ift
hedr ugsarealr
eadyinseal edplast
ic
-nPeopl
I evsResurrecci
on,2009,itwasheldt
hatthefail
ure sachets-thepoli
ceoffi
cerinvolved
ofthepol
icementoimmediatel
ymar ktheconf
iscat
editems i
mmedi at
elypl
aceidenti
fyi
ngmar ksonthe
doesnotautomati
call
yimpai
rtheintegr
it
yofchainof cover.
cust Peopl
ody( evsFranci
sco,2011)
b. I
fthedr ugsarenotinaseal
edcontai
ner-
17.I
DENTI
FYI
NGMARKSBYTHEPOLI CEOFFI
CER theoffi
ceristopl
acethem i
nasealed
ONTHESEALEDPLASTI
CSACHETCONTAINI
NG contai
ner,sealt
hecontai
nerandputhis
DRUGS markingont hecover.

-Sincet
hecustodyandpossessionofthedrugsusual
l
y -Inthi
swayt herei
sassur
ancethatt
hedrugswouldreach
changefrom t
heti
met heyareseizedt
othet i
metheyare thecrimelaborat
oryanal
ysti
nthesameconditi
oni
twas
present
edincourt
,iti
sindi
spensablet
hat: seizedfr
om theaccused(Peopl
evsUlep,2011)

a. I
fthedr
ugsar
eal
readyi
nseal
edpl
ast
icsachet
s-t
he
 20.CORPUSDELI
CTII
NPROSECUTI
ONFORI
LLEGAL 2. DEFI
NITI
ONOFTERMS
DRUGS
Sec3oftheDNAEvidenceRule(
AM No.06-
11-5-SC)
-I
nprosecuti
oni
nvolvi
ngnarcoti
csandot heril
l
egal provi
desf
ort
hedef
init
ionoft
ermsundert
her
ules.I
tst
ates
subst
ances,t
hesubstanceit
selfisthecor pusdel
ict
ioft
he t
hat:
off
enseandthefactofit
sexi
stencei svi
tal t
osust
aina
Sec.3DEFI
NITI
ONOFTERMS
j
udgmentofconvict
ionbeyondr easonabledoubt.
a. Biologicalsample-meansanyor gani
cmat eri
al
-Thechainofcustodyrequir
ementi sessent
ialt
oensuret
hat
ori
ginatingfrom aperson’sbody,eveniff
oundi n
doubtsregar
dingtheidenti
tyoftheevidenceareremoved
i
nani mateobj ect
s,t
hatissuscepti
blet
oDNAt esti
ng.
thr
ought hemonitori
ngandt r
ackingofthemovement sof
Thisincludesblood,sal
ivaandotherbodyf l
uids,t
issues,
thesei
zeddrugsf rom t
heaccused,tot hepoli
ce,t
othe
hair
sandbones.
for
ensicchemistandf i
nal
l
yt othecourt Peopl
.( evsSit
co,
2010) b. DNA-meansdeoxyr ibonuclei
cacidwhichi
sthechai
n
ofmoleculesf
oundineverynucl eat
edcel
loft
hebody.
-I
notherwords
,theexi
stenceoft
hedanger
ousdrugi
sa
Thetotal
i
tyofanindi
vidual
’sDNAi suni
quefort
he
condi
ti
onsinequanonforconvi
cti Peopl
on( evsDe
i
ndivi
dualEXCEPTidenti
caltwins.
Guzman,2010)
 DNAi sthef
undamentalbuildi
ngbl ockofa
21.RULEONTHEPRESUMPTI
ONOFREGULARI
TYI
N
person’
sent
iregeneti
cmake- up.DNAi sfound
THEPRESERVATI
ONOFSEI
ZEDDRUGS
i
nal l
humancell
sandi sthesamei neverycell
-t
heunj ust
if
iedfai
l
ureoft hepoliceoffi
cerstoshowt hatthe ofthesameperson.Hence,aper son’
sDNA
i
ntegri
tyoftheobjectevi
dencewaspr operl
ypreser ved profi
l
ecandeterminehisident
ity.
negatesthepresumptionofr egular
it
yaccor dertoact s
c. DNAEvi dence-const
it
utesthetotali
tyoftheDNA
undertakenbypoli
ceof f
icersinthepur sui
toftheiroffi
cial
prof
il
es,result
sandot
hergeneticinformationdi
rect
ly
duti
es.(PeoplevsNavaret t
e,2011)
generat
edf rom DNAt
estingofbiological
samples;
22.MODEOFAUTHENTICATI
NGTHEEVI DENCEIN
d. DNAPr ofil
e-meansgenet i
cinf
ormati
onderivedfrom
THECHAINOFCUSTODYREQUIRES
DNAt esti
ngofbiologicalsampleobtai
nedf r
om a
PRESENTATI
ONOFTHESEIZEDPROHIBITED
person,whichbiologi
cal sampleiscl
earl
yidenti
fi
ableas
DRUGS
ori
ginat
ingfrom thatperson;
-thepr
esentat
ionofthesei
zedprohibi
tedrugsasanexhi
bit
e. DNATest ing-meansver ifi
edandcr ediblescientif
ic
beprecededbyevidencesuff
ici
enttosupportafi
ndi
ngthat
met hodswhi chincl udetheextracti
onofDNAf rom
thematt
erinquesti
oniswhattheproponentclai
msitt
obe.
biologi calsampl es,t hegenerati
onofDNApr of i
l
esand
-thiswouldideall
ycoverthetes
timonyaboutever yli
nkinthe thecompar i
sonoft heinformati
onobt ainedfrom the
chain,fr
om seizureoftheprohi
bit
eddr ugupt otheti
mei tis DNAt esti
ngofbi ologicalsamplesforthepur poseof
offeredi
nevi dence,insuchawayt hateveryonewho det ermi ni
ng,wi thr easonablecertai
nty,whet herornot
touchedtheexhi bitwoul
ddescri
behowandf r
om whom i t theDNAobt ainedf rom twoormor edistinctbi
ological
wasr eceived,toincl
ude,asmuchaspossi bleadescripti
on sampl esor iginatesf r
om thesameper son( di
rect
ofthecondi t
ioninwhichitwasdeli
veredtot henexti
nl i
nk. i
dent i
ficati
on)ori fthebiologi
calsampl esor i
ginatefr
om
relatedper sons( kinshipanalysi
s);and
C. DNAEVI
DENCERULEI
NRELATI
ONTOOBJECT
EVI
DENCE f
. Probabil
it
yofPercentage-meanst henumeri
cal
esti
matefort
helikel
ihoodofparentageofaputati
ve
1. APPLI
CATI
ONOFTHERULESOFCOURT
parentcomparedwiththeprobabil
i
tyofarandom
Sec.2oftheDNAEvidenceRule(
AM No.06-11-
5-SC) matchof2unrelatedindi
vi
dualsinagivenpopulat
ion.
provi
desf
ortheappl
i
cati
onoftherul
esonevi
dence

Sec2.APPLI
CATI
ONOFOTHERRULESONEVI
DENCE
DNAAnalysi
s-procedur
einwhi
chDNAextractedfr
om a
-I
nallmat t
ersnotspeci
fi
cal
lycoveredbyt
hisRul
e,t
heRules bi
ologi
cal
sampleobtai
nedfr
om ani
ndi
vi
dualisexamined.
ofCourtandot herper
ti
nentprovi
si
onsofl
awonevidence
 TheDNAisprocessedtogener
ateapatter
n,or
shal
lapply.
aDNAprofi
l
e,fortheindi
vi
dualf
rom whom the
sampl
eist
aken.
  Thi
sDNAprof
il
eisuni
queforeachper
son, -
Substanti
alorcontenti
ousalt
erati
onsmaybeal lowedonl
y
EXCEPTf
ori
denti
calt
wins. i
nadversari
alproceedings,i
nwhi chal
li
nterest
edparti
esar
e
i
mpleadedandduepr ocessi
spr oper
lyobserved.
3. APPLI
CATI
ONFORDNATESTI
NG
 NON-PATERNI
TYOFTHEACCUSEDTHRUDNA
Sec4oftheDNAEvi
denceRule(
AM No.06-11-5-SC)
TESTWILLNOTNEGATETHECRI
MEOFRAPE
provi
desf
ort
her
equi
rementofDNATest
ingOrder.I
tst
ates
t
hat: 1
. Pregnancyandthesubsequentbi rt
hofthechil
dare
notelementsofthecrimeofr ape.Non-pat
erni
tyof
Sec.4APPLI
CATI
ONFORDNATESTI
NGORDER
theappell
ant,wi
llnotnecessari
lynegat
ethecri
me
-Theappropri
atecourtmay,atanyti
me,eithermot upr opri
o ofrapeaspositi
velyprovedandest abl
i
shedby
oronappli
cati
onofanyper sonwhohasal egal i
nterestin credi
bletest
imony.
thematt
erinli
ti
gati
on,orderaDNAt est
ing.Suchor dershall
 Theremayormaynotbeconcept ionaft
er
i
ssueaft
erduehear i
ngandnot i
cetothepar t
iesupona
thecommi ssi
onofthecri
meofr ape
showi
ngoft hefol
lowi
ng:
becausetheof f
ensemaybe
a. Abi
ologi
cal
sampl
eexi
stst
hati
srel
evantt
othecase; consummat edevenwithoutf
ull
penetrati
on
orevencompl eteej
acul
ati
onont hepartof
b. Thebi
ologi
cal
sampl
e: theassai
l
ant .

i
. Wasnotprevi
ousl
ysubj
ectedt
othet
ypeof  TheCourthast
imeandagainstr
essedthat
DNAtest
ingnowrequest
ed;or amongthemostimport
antconsi
derat
ionin
arapecaseist
hecredi
blet
esti
monyoft he
i
i
. Wasprevi
ousl
ysubjectedt
oDNAt est
ing,but
vi
cti
m.
t
heresul
tsmayrequir
econfir
mat
ionforgood
r
eason.  TheCourthasr epeat
edlyheldthatwhena
womansaysshehasbeenr aped,her
c. TheDNAt
est
ingusesasci
ent
if
ical
l
yval
i
dtechni
que
decl
arati
onaloneisallt
hatisnecessaryto
d. TheDNAtesti
nghasthesci
enti
fi
cpotent
ial
toproduce showthatshehadi ndeedbeenr apedand
newinf
ormati
onthati
srel
evantt
otheproperr
esolut
ion hersol
etesti
monyi ssuffi
ci
entifi
tsati
sfi
es
oft
hecase;and theexact
ingstandardofcredibi
li
tyneeded
toconvi
cttheaccused.
e. Theexistenceofotherfactors,ifany,whichthecour t
mayconsi deraspotenti
all
yaf fecti
ngtheaccur acyor
i
ntegri
tyoftheDNAt esting.ThisRul eshall
notpr eclude
2. Fortheconvi ct
ionoft heaccused,thepregnancyof
aDNAt est
ing,wit
houtneedofapr i
orcourtorder ,atthe
thevicti
mi snotrequir edt
obepr oved,si
nceiti
s
behestofanypar t
y,incl
udingl awenf orcement
suffi
cientthatt
hepr osecut i
onest
abli
shbeyond
agencies,befor
easui torproceedi ngiscommenced.
reasonabledoubt ,thattheaccusedhadforced
sexual r
elati
onswi t
ht hevicti
m.

Not
e:  I
SSUEOFDNATESTMUSTBEBROUGHTDURI
NG
THEPROCEEDI
NGSOTHERWI
SEWAIVED
 SUBJECTOFTHEHEARI
NGINASCERTAI
NING
THEFEASI
BILI
TYOFDNATESTI
NG  MATTERSTOBECONSI
DEREDINDNATESTI
NG;
BURDENANDQUANTUM OFEVI
DENCE
-Theheari
ngshoul
dbeconf inedt
oascertai
ningt
he
feasi
bil
i
tyofDNAtesti
ngwithdueregar
dt othest
andar
ds -Duringtheheari
ngont hemotionforDNAtest
ing,the
setinSect
ion4(a)
,(b),(
c)andoftheRules. peti
ti
onermustpr esentpr
imafacieevi
denceorestabl
ish
reasonablepossi
bil
it
yofpater
nity.
 DNATESTING,I
SSUEONNULLI
TYOFMARRIAGE,
LEGI
TIMACYANDFILI
ATI
ONNOTAVAI
LABLEINA -t
heRuleshall
notprecludeaDNAt est
ing,wit
houtneedofa
PETI
TIONFORCORRECTI
ONOFENTRI
ES pri
orcour
torder,att
hebehestofanypar t
y,i
ncludi
nglaw
enfor
cementagencies,befor
easuitorproceedingis
-
Inaspecialproceedi
ngforcorrect
ionofentr
yunderRul
e
commenced.
1
08,thetri
alcourthasnojuri
sdi
cti
ontonull
if
ymarri
agesand
r
uleonlegi
ti
macyandf il
i
ation. -t
hisdoesnotmeanhoweverthataDNAtest
ingorderwi
ll
be
i
ssuedasamat t
erofr
ighti
f,dur
ingt
heheari
ng,t
hesaid
condi
ti
onsar
eest
abl
i
shed. componentoftheDNAevi
dencet
hatmaybeobt
ainedasa
resul
tther
eof
.
 Thus,dur i
ngtheheari
ngont hemot ionforDNA
testi
ng,thepeti
ti
onermustpr esentpri
maf aci
e REMEDY
evidenceorestabli
shareasonablepossibil
it
yof
-
Pet
it
ionf
orr
evi
ewoncer
ti
orar
iunderRul
e45
paterni
ty.
-
Anypeti
ti
onf
orcer
ti
orar
ishal
lnotstayt
heimplement
ati
on
-t
heissuanceofaDNAt
est
ingor
derr
emai
nsdi
scr
eti
onar
y
t
her
eof
,UNLESSahighercour
tissuesaninj
uncti
veor
der
uponthecourt
.
I
ncaseofr
efusal
tocompl
yforDNAt
est
ing:
-t
hecourtmayconsiderwhet
hert
her
eisabsol
utenecessi
ty
offort
heDNAtesti
ng a. Enteradefaul
tjudgmentatt
her
equestoft
he
appropr
iat
eparty;
-I
fthereisal
readypreponderanceofevi
dencetoestabl
i
sh
pater
nit
yandt heDNAt estr
esultwoul
donlybecorrobor
ati
ve, b. I
fat ri
alishel
d,all
owthediscl
osur
eofthef
actoft
he
t
hecour tmay,ini
tsdiscr
eti
ondisal
lowaDNAt est
ing. refusalUNLESSgoodcauseshownf ornot
discl
osingthefactofr
efusal
.
 FAI
LURETOPRODUCETHESEMENSPECI
MEN
NOTAGROUNDFORACQUITTAL DNASAMPLESTAKENFROM THEPARTYDOESNOT
VI
OLATETHERIGHTOFTHEACCUSEDAGAINSTSELF-
-
ther
eisnor
ightf
oracqui
tt
alduet
olossofDNAevi
dence.
I
NCRIMI
NATION
4. COURSESOFACTI
ONOFTHECOURTONTHE
-
becausethi
spri
vi
legeappl
iesonl
ytoevidencethati
s
APPLI
CATI
ON
“
communicati
ve”i
nessencetakenunderduress.
Sec.5oftheDNAEvidenceRule(AM No.06-
11-5-SC)
-Theri
ghtagai nstself
-incri
minationi
sjustaprohibi
ti
onon
provi
desf
orther
uleontheact
ionsthatmaybeincl
udedi
n
theuseofphysi calormor alcompulsi
ont oext
ort
t
heDNATest i
ngOrder.
communi cati
on( t
esti
moni alevi
dence)from adefendant
,not
Sec.5DNATESTI
NGORDER anexclusi
onofevi dencet akenfrom hi
sbodywheni tmay
bemat eri
al.
-I
fthecour
tfi
ndsthatt
herequi
rementsi
nSect
ion4her
eof
havebeencompli
edwith,t
hecourtshal
l
: 5. POST-
CONVI
CTI
ONDNATESTI
NG

a. Order
,whereappropr
iat
e,t
hatbi
ologi
cal
samplesbe Sec.6oft heDNAEvidenceRul
e(AM No.06-11-
5- SC)
t
akenfrom anyper
sonorcri
mesceneevidence; provi
desforther
uleontheavai
l
mentofpost
-convict
ion
DNAt est
ing
b. Imposer easonableconditionsonDNAt est
ingdesigned
toprotecttheint
egrityofthebiologi
cal sample,the Sec.6POST-
CONVI
CTI
ONDNATESTI
NG
test
ingprocessandt hereli
abil
i
tyofthet estresul
ts,
-maybeavai l
abl
e,wit
houtneedofpri
orcour
tor
der,t
othe
i
ncludingthecondi t
ionthattheDNAt estresult
sshallbe
prosecut
ionoranypersonconvi
ctedbyf
inal
andexecut
ory
simult
aneouslydisclosedtopar t
iesi
nvol vedinthecase;
j
udgmentpr ovi
dedthat:
and
a. Abi
ologi
cal
sampl
eexi
sts
c. I
fthebi ological
samplet akenisofsuchamountt hat
preventst heconductofconf i
rmator
ytesti
ngbyt he b. Suchsampl
eisr
elevantt
othecase;and
otherort headversepartyandwher eadditi
onal
bi
ological samplesofthesameki ndcannol ongerbe c. Thet
est
ingwoul
dpr
obabl
yresul
tinthereversal
or
obtai
ned,i ssueanorderr equi
ringal
lpart
iestothecase modi
fi
cati
onoft
hej
udgmentorconvict
ion.
orproceedi ngstowitnesstheDNAt esti
ngtobe
conduct ed.
6. ASSESSMENTOFPROBATI
VEVALUEOFTHE
DNAEVIDENCE
NATUREOFTHEDNATESTI
NGORDER
Sec.7oft
heDNAEvi denceRule(AM No.06-11-
5-SC)
-
immedi
atel
yexecut
oryandshal
lnotbeappeal
abl
e provi
desf
ortherul
eontheassessmentofpr
obati
veval
ueof
t
heDNAevi dence.
-ThegrantofaDNAtest
ingappl
icati
onshal
lnotbe
const
ruedasanaut
omat i
cadmissionint
oevi
denceofany Sec.7ASSESSMENTOFPROBATI
VEVALUEOFDNA
EVI
DENCE DATATOBECONSIDEREDI
NDETERMINI
NGTHE
PROBATI
VEVALUEOFTHEDNAEVIDENCE
-
thecour
tshal
lconsi
dert
hef
oll
owi
ng:
a. Howt
hesampl
eswer
ecol
l
ect
ed
a. Thechainofcustody,i
ncludi
nghowt hebiol
ogi
cal
sampleswerecoll
ected,howt heywerehandl
ed,and b. Howt
heywer
ehandl
ed
thepossi
bil
i
tyofcontaminati
onofthesamples.
c. Thepossi
bil
i
tyofcont
ami
nat
ionoft
hesampl
es
b. TheDNATest i
ngMet hodology,incl
udi
ngthepr ocedure
d. Thepr
ocedur
efol
l
owedi
nanal
yzi
ngt
hesampl
es
foll
owedinanalyzi
ngthesampl es,t
headvantagesand
disadvant
agesofthepr ocedure,andcompl i
ancewith e. Whethert
heproperstandar
dsandprocedur
eswer
e
thescient
if
ical
l
yvali
dstandardsi nconduct
ingthetests; f
oll
owedinconducti
ngt het
est
s,and

c. TheForensi
cDNALaborat
ory,i
ncludi
ngaccredi
tati
on f
. Thequal
i
fi
cat
ionoft
heanal
ystwhoconduct
edt
he
byanyreput
abl
est
andar
ds-sett
inginst
it
uti
onandthe test
s.
qual
i
fi
cati
onoft
heanal
ystwhoconduct edthet
ests.

 I
fthelaborat
oryisnotaccredi
ted-therelevant
exper
ienceoft hel
abor
atoryinfor
ensiccasewor k
andcredibi
li
tyshal
lbeproperl
yestabl
ished;and
7. RELI
ABI
LITYOFTHEDNATESTI
NG
METHODOLOGY

d. Thereli
abi
lit
yoft hetest i
ngresul
t,asherei
naf
ter Sec.8oftheDNAEvidenceRule(AM No.06-
11-
5-SC)
provi
ded.Thepr ovisionsoftheRulesofCourt provi
desf
orther
uleontherel
i
abil
i
tyoftheDNATest
ing
concerni
ngt heappr eciati
onofevidenceshal
lappl
y Methodol
ogy.
suppl
etori
ly.
Sec.8RELI
ABI
LITYOFDNATESTI
NGMETHODOLOGY

-
Ineval
uati
ngwhethertheDNAtest
ingmethodol
ogyi
s
-
Cour
tsshoul
dconsi
dert
hef
oll
owi
ng: r
eli
abl
e,t
hecourtshal
lconsi
dert
hefoll
owi
ng:

1
. Howt
hesampl
eswer
ecol
l
ect
ed a. Thefal
si
fi
abil
it
yofthepr
inci
plesormet
hodsused,t
hat
i
swhetherthetheor
yort
echniquecanbeandhasbeen
2. Howt
heywer
ehandl
ed test
ed

3. Thepossi
bil
i
tyofcont
ami
nat
ionoft
hesampl
es b. Thesubject
iont
opeerrevi
ewandpubl
i
cat
ionoft
he
pri
nci
plesormethods
;
4. Thepr
ocedur
efol
l
owedi
nanal
yzi
ngt
hesampl
es
c. Thegeneralaccept
anceofthepr
inci
plesormet
hods
5. Whethert
heproperstandar
dsandprocedur
eswer
e
byther
elevantsci
enti
fi
ccommunit
y;
f
oll
owedinconducti
ngt het
est
s,and
d. Theexi
stenceandmai
ntenanceofstandardsand
6. Thequal
i
fi
cat
ionoft
heanal
ystwhoconduct
edt
he
cont
rol
stoensuret
hecorr
ectnessofdatagather
ed;
test
s.
e. Theexi
stenceofanappr
opr
iat
eref
erencepopul
ati
on
DNAANALYSI
SBASEDONACONTAMI
NATEDSPECI
MEN
dat
abase;and
I
SNOTCONCLUSIVE
f
. Thegener al
degreeofconfidenceattr
ibutedto
-
whent
hespeci
meni
sal
readyst
ainedorcont
ami
nat
ed
mat hemat i
calcal
cul
ati
onsusedi ncompar ingDNA
OFFEROFTHEDNARNARESULT:COURTSHALLASSESS profil
esandt hesi
gnif
icanceandl i
mit
ationofstat
ist
ical
THEDNARESULTS calculat
ionsusedincompar i
ngDNApr ofi
les.

-Aft
ertheDNAAnalysis,i
tshal
lbeincumbentuponthe
part
ieswhowisht
oavai loft
hesamet ooff
ertheresul
tsi
n
8. EVALUATI
ONOFTHEDNATESTI
NGRESULTS
accordancewi
tht
her ulesofevi
dence.
Sec.9oftheDNAEvidenceRul
e(AM No.06-
11-
5-SC)
-TheRTCi neval
uati
ngtheDNAr esul
tsuponpresent
ati
on,
provi
desf
orther
uleontheeval
uat
ionoft
heDNATest
ing
shal
lassessthesameasevidenceinkeepingwit
hSecti
ons
Resul
ts
7and8oft heRul Peopl
es.( evsUmani t
o,2007)
Sec.9EVALUATI
ONOFDNATESTI
NGRESULTS pr
ofi
l
es,r
esul
tsandi
nfor
mat
ion.

-I
nevaluati
ngtheresul
tsofDNATest
ing,t
hecour
tshal
l Sec.11CONFI
DENTI
ALI
TY
consi
derthefol
lowing:
GR:DNApr of
il
esandal
lresul
tsorot
heri
nfor
mation
a. Theeval
uat
ionoft
hewei
ghtofmat
chi
ngDNAevidence obt
ainedf
rom DNAtest
ingshall
beconfi
dent
ial
.
ort
herel
evanceofmi
smatchi
ngDNAevi
dence;
XPN:Uponor deroft
hecourt,aDNApr of
il
eandal lr
esul
tsor
b. Theresult
softheDNAtest
ingint
heli
ghtofthet
otal
i
ty otheri
nformat
ionobt
ainedfrom DNAt est
ingshall
onlybe
oft
heot herevi
dencepr
esentedi
nthecase;and rel
easedtoanyofthefoll
owing,undersucht er
msand
condit
ionsasmaybesetf or
thbythecour t:
c. DNAr esul
tst
hatexcl
udetheput
ati
veparentf
rom
pat
ernit
yshal
lbeconclusi
vepr
oofofnon-pat
erni
ty. a. Per
sonf
rom whom t
hesampl
ewast
aken

 I
ftheval
ueoftheProbabi
li
tyofPaterni
tyi
slesst
han b. Lawyersrepr
esenti
ngpart
iesinthecaseoracti
on
99.9%,t
heresul
tsoftheDNAt esti
ngshal
lbe wheretheDNAevi dencei
sof fer
edandpresent
edor
consi
der
edascor r
oborat
iveevidence. soughtt
obeof f
eredandpr esented;

 I
ftheval
ueoft hePr
obabi
l
it
yofPater
nit
yis99.
9% c. Lawyer
sofpr
ivat
ecompl
ai
nant
sinacr
imi
nal
act
ion;
orhi
gher,ther
eshal
lbeadisput
abl
epresumpti
on
d. Dul
yaut
hor
izedl
awenf
orcementagenci
es;and
ofpat
erni
ty.
e. Ot
herper
sonsasdet
ermi
nedbyt
hecour
t.

-Whoeverdi scl
oses,uti
li
zesorpubl i
shesinanyf orm any
9. POST-
CONVI
CTI
ONDNATESTI
NGRESULTS:
i
nformationconcerningaDNApr ofil
ewithoutthepr oper
REMEDYI
FFAVORABLE
courtordershal
lbeliabl
ef orindi
rectcontemptoft hecourt
Sec.10oftheDNAEvi denceRul
e( AM No.06-
11-5-SC) whereinsuchDNAevi dencewasof f
ered,presentedor
provi
desfortherul
eonthepost
-convi
cti
onDNAt est
ing soughttobeof f
eredandpr esent
ed.
resul
tsandtheremedyiff
avor
able.
-Wheret heper sonf rom whom thebiologi
calsamplewas
Sec.10POST-
CONVICTI
ONDNATESTI
NG,REMEDYI
F takenfi
lesawr i
ttenverif
iedrequesttothecourtthatall
owed
RESULTSAREFAVORABLETOTHECONVI
CT theDNAt est
ingf orthediscl
osureoftheDNApr ofi
l
eoft he
personandal l r
esultsorotherinf
ormationobtai
nedf r
om the
-Theconvi
ctort
heprosecuti
onmayf i
l
eapet it
ionforwri
tof
DNAt esti
ng,t hesamemaybedi sclosedtothepersons
habeascorpusi
nthecourtofor
igi
nift
her esul
tsofthepost
-
namedi nt hewr i
ttenveri
fiedrequest.
convi
cti
onDNAtesti
ngarefavor
abletotheconvict
.
11.PRESERVATI
ONOFDNAEVI
DENCE
-I
ncasethecourt,aft
erduehear
ing,f
indst
hepet
it
iont
obe
meri
tor
ious,i
tshal
l: Sec.12oft heDNAEvidenceRule(AM No.06-11-
5-SC)
providesf
ortherul
eonthepres
ervati
onoftheDNA
a. r
ever
seormodi
fyt
hej
udgmentofconvi
cti
onand
evidence.
b. ordert
herel
easeoftheconvi
ct,UNLESScont
inued
Sec.12PRESERVATI
ONOFDNAEVI
DENCE
detent
ioni
sjust
if
iedf
oralawf
ul cause.
-Thetri
alcourtshal
lpr
eservetheDNAevi
denceinit
stotal
i
ty,
-Asimi
l
arpet
it
ionmaybef
il
edeit
heri
ntheCAort
heSC,or
i
ncludi
ngallbiologi
cal
samples,DNAprof
il
esandresult
sor
wit
hanymemberofsai
dcourt
s,whi
chmay:
othergeneti
cinformat
ionobtai
nedfr
om t
heDNAt est
ing.
a. conductahear
ingt
her
eonor
-Fort
hispur
pose,t
hecourtmayordert
heappropri
ate
b. remandthepeti
ti
ontot
hecour
tofor
igi
nandi
ssue gover
nmentagencytopr
eservet
heDNAevi denceas
appropr
iat
eorders. fol
l
ows:

a. I
ncr
imi
nal
cases:

10.CONFIDENTI
ALNATUREOFTHEPROFI
LESAND i
. Fornotl
esst
hantheper
iodofthet
imethatany
RESULTS personi
sundert
ri
alf
oranoff
ense;or

Sec.11oftheDNAEvi
denceRule(AM No.06-11-
5-SC) i
i
. Incasetheaccusedi
sservi
ngsentence,unt
il
provi
desfort
herul
eontheconf
ident
ial
i
tyoft
heDNA suchti
meast heaccusedhasser
vedhi s
 sent
ence;and 6. WHENI
SADOCUMENTORI
GINAL?

b. I
nallot
hercases,unti
lsuchti
meast
hedecisi
onint
he 7. WHENISACOPYOFANELECTRONIC
casewheretheDNAevi dencewasi
ntr
oducedhas DOCUMENTEQUI
VALENTTOORI
GINAL
becomefi
nal andexecutor
y.

 Thecourtmayall
owthephysi
caldest
ruct
ionof
I
V. SECONDARYEVI
DENCE
abiol
ogi
calsamplebef
oretheexpi
rat
ionofthe
per
iodssetf
ort
habove,provi
dedthat
: A. SECONDARYEVI
DENCE

1
. Acourtor
dert
othatef
fecthasbeen 1
. WHATI
SSECONDARYEVI
DENCE
secur
ed;or
2. RULEWHENTHEORI
GINALDOCUMENTI
S
2. Thepersonfrom whom t
heDNAsample UNAVAI
LABLE
wasobtainedhasconsent
edinwr
it
ingt
o
thedi
sposaloftheevi
dence. 3. HOW TOPROVETHELOSTORDESTROYED
WILL

4. RULEI
NCASETHEORIGI
NALDOCUMENTI
S
12.APPLI
CABI
LITYOFTHERULESTOPENDI
NG I
NTHEADVERSEPARTY’
SCUSTODYOR
CASES CONTROL

Sec.13oftheDNAEvi denceRul
e(AM No.06-
11-
5-SC) 5. RULEI
NCASETHEORI
GINALI
SAPUBLI
C
provi
desf
ort her
uleonappli
cabi
l
it
yoft
heDNAevidence RECORD
rul
etopendingcases.
6. PARTYCALLI
NGFORTHEDOCUMENTNOT
Sec.13APPLI
CABI
LITYTOPENDI
NGCASES BOUNDTOOFFERIT.

-Exceptasprovi
dedi
nSecti
ons6and10hereof
,thi
sRule
shal
lapplyt
ocasespendi
ngatthet
imeofi
tseff
ecti
vi
ty.
V. PAROLEVI
DENCERULE
D. RULESONPHOTOGRAPHICVI
DEOANDOTHER
SI
MILAREVI
DENCEUNDERTHERULESON A. PAROLEEVI
DENCERULE
ENVI
RONMENTALCASES
1
. WHATI
SPAROLEVI
DENCE?
E. RULESONAUDIO,PHOTOGRAPHI
C,VI
DEOAND
2. WHATI SPAROLEVI
DENCERULE?
EPHEMERALEVI
DENCEUNDERTHEELECTRONI
C
EXCEPTIONS
EVI
DENCERULES
3. WHERETOFILEACOMPLAINTFOR
1
. RULESONAUDIO,PHOTOGRAPHI
C,VI
DEOAND
REFORMATI
ONOFINSTRUMENT
EPHEMERALEVI
DENCEUNDERTHEELECTRONI
C
EVI
DENCERULES

2. RULESONEPHEMERALCOMMUNI
CATI
ON

I
II
. DOCUMENTARYEVI
DENCE

A. DOCUMENTARYEVI
DENCE

1
. WHATI
SDOCUMENTARYEVI
DENCE

2. WHATI
SANELECTRONI
CEVI
DENCE

3. PRIVI
LEGEDCOMMUNICATI
ONON
ELECTRONICEVI
DENCE

4. BESTEVI
DENCERULE

5. ORIGI
NALOFTHEDOCUMENTUNDERTHE
BESTEVI
DENCERULE