Evidence.docx

Evidence is the means sanctioned by the Rules of Court of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the truth respecting a matter of fact. - so coerced extrajudicial confessions are not allowed

The rules on evidence apply to all cases except the following 1. Cadastral cases 2. Land registration cases 3. Insolvency 4. Naturalization 5. Election cases

The law to use is the law at the time of presentation of evidence in court or time it is offered. Not the time it was found or taken and so on - no vested right created

In civil cases, offer of compromise does not raise any liability while in criminal cases, it may raise guilt Classification of evidence

Factum probandum and factum probans - the proposition or fact being proved and the facts or evidence to prove it

They are to be liberally construed

1. Direct evidence - prove by sense, no need to deduce or infer since it speaks for itself 2. Object or real evidence autoptic proferance - Evidence furnished by things or physical objects on view or inspection, as distinguished from description thereof by witnesses. (e.g. scars, marks, photos) - ensure no changes = they are known or perceived by the senses even like portrayals of map - They must be authenticated to be admissible and they are done by testimony as to the contents by persons that know them Kinds A. Unique objects - have identifiable marks like a serial number B. Objects made unique - made identifiable by a persons testimony C. Non unique objects - non identifiable like footprints 3. Circumstantial evidence - a fact reached by infering from direct or object evidence - indirect evidence for it is merely inferred from other evidences - based on common experience of man How proved CFC 1. More than one circumstance 2. The facts from where they were derived are proven

3. Their combination is enough for a conviction beyond reasonable doubt

May not be accepted by court in case of 1. Not morally decent - this may be allowed if interest of justice so requires then the public will just not be allowed to view it 2. To much delay or expense for its evidentiary value 3. Evidence already presented is enough for what is being proved 4. Evidence is confusing or misleading

Ocular inspection to be valid must be with notice to parties and their presence, it is a part of the trial

Chain of custody rule - for drugs and a method of authenticating- documenting each step - is necessary is evidence is non unique or not identifiable like blood 4. Corroborative evidence - evidence of a different kind from one already offered and which tends to prove the same proposition and facts that is wanted to prove - such as testimony and document or object - necessary only is there are suspicions and the testimony of a child witness if credible enough does not need corroborative evidence 5. Cumulative = evidence of the same kind that proves the same fact or proposition - such document and another document 6. Positive = if he states that he did see or did not see - happening is yes or a no 7. Negative - if he state that he does not know because he was not paying attention = happening is either way, he does not know

8. Documentary evidence - evidence that consists of writings, words, letter, figures, symbols or other modes of written expression, offered as proof of their contents Requisites A. The document is relevant B. The document is authenticated C. The document is formally offered in evidence Applicable rules A. Best evidence rule - subject of inquiry is contents of a paper then the only proof to it is the original document itself Exception - secondary or non original documents may instead be presented = secondary evidence performs the same functions as original documents - presentable in these cases only - lay first the basis by showing, execution and existences of the paper, reason for unavailability, and not due to his fault or bad faith - secondary’s order of preference A. An original copy

B. Recital of contents in an authenticated document C. Witness testimony When secondary is allowed BANP a. When the original has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, without bad faith on the part of the offeror.

b. 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.

c. 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. d. When the document is under the custody of a public officer or a record in a public office - it may be proved by certified copy or official publication Where the issue is not the contents but instead just its existence or execution then the rule does not apply and testimonial evidence is allowed Misnomer for it only applies to documentary evidence Considered also a original copy - executed and identical and so signed, repeadted entries of transaction at about the same time at regular course of business One who calls for evidence and not uses it - no negative inference can be drawn, he does not need to use it B. Parol evidence rule - may be testimonial, real, or documentary - it is aliunde or extrinsic that intends to modify, alter, and so the terms of a written agreement = there is presumption that in case of a written agreement, it is presumed that it already contains all the terms and conditions they agreed upon = may only only introduce extrinsinc on these instances by putting it as issue in his pleadings IIVE 1. 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. 4. existence of other terms agreed to by the parties or their successors in interest after the execution of the written agreement. Particular rule on wills - examine the whole will first and if there is still ambiguity then only then introduce written extrinsic - oral is not allowed to prevent folks from perjuring themselves Private document - A private document is considered as object evidence when it is addressed to the senses of the court or when it is presented to establish certain physical evidence or characteristics that are visible on the paper or writings that comprise the document. It is considered as documentary evidence when it is offered as proof of its contents.

Authentication not required = AAPIN 1. The writing is an ancient document. Proved generally by witnesses - if no available testimony then it must be at least 30 years old, found at its natural founding place, and unblemished by alterations or no suspicious circumstance 2. The writing is a public document or record. genuineness of a signature or maker 3. The writing is a notarial document

Private document is proved by witness or

acknowledged, proved or certified.

4. The authenticity and due execution of the document has been admitted or impliedly admitted by failure to deny the same under oath. 5. When genuineness and due execution are immaterial to the issue. A handwriting may be proved by one who saw the writing or signing, an opinion of a person who has acquired familiarity with the person’s handwriting, and by comparison of specimen by an expert witness Entries in public record are prima facie presumed to be entered by them in the performance of their duties. A record is proved by official record or attestation of the officer but still presumed as valid

Admissibility refers if it can be admitted and weight refers to probative value = credibility is believable

Kinds of admissibility of evidence 1. Multiple admissibility - if admissibile for a purpose then it is admissible for that and not for another that it is not admissible for - bad reputation may not be used as evidence of guilt against the accused but bad reputation may be used as impeachment of credibility of a witness 2. Conditional admissibility - a fact is admitted in order to prove another fact down the line - if not proved later on then the 1st fact is stricken from the record 3. Curative admissibility - inadmissible fact admitted without objection then another inadmissible fact in relation to that may be admitted to defend - to be fair, eye for an eye

Test of admissibility of evidence 1. Relevancy - fact is relevent if fact in issue would induce belief of its existence or not = probability of fact in issue 2. Competency - competent if not excluded by law or rules - statute of fraud, fruit of a poisoned tree, and an extrajudicial confession But for test or taint doctrince - results from an illegal search

Collateral matter - a matter without direct connect to the fact in issue - it is not admissible for it tends to draw away the court from the fact in issue then it excites and causes prejudice in the mind of the court

An example is in murder, the fact to be proved is if a person killed the victim and so motive has no direct connection since having a motive does not prove that he killed

Exception when the matter raises the probability of guilt or having commited it then it is admissible

Judicial notice and judicial admission JN is a shortcut that need not be proved, its requisites are common and general knowledge, authoritively settled and not doubtful, not subject to a reasonable dispute

Kinds of JN 1. Mandatory - the court must take no matter what 2. Discretionary - must have a hearing and there is discretion- of public knowledge, capable of unquestionable demonstration or beyond reasonable doubt, known by judge due to judicial functions or within jurisdiction - KJD A hearing shall be held on request of a party or on the court’s own initiative - can be held before judgement or appeal

Foreign law needs to be proved generally - if not processual presumption or presumed identical approach, or presumed the same as local law and so local law is applied

exception 1. Generally known 2. Ruled open on previous cases before it 3. Parties consent or allow

Local ordinance - mtc must take cognizance, rtc yes if expressly authorized by statute or it is on appeal and the mtc applied it. Appelate may if capable of unquestionable demonstration

Records of other courts are generally not to be taken notice of unless parties consent to it, res judicata, is of paramount importane to the public and the cases are so closely interrelated

Different judges have different appreciations of same testimony

The supreme court must always be taken notice of

A JUDICIAL ADMISSION is an admission, verbal or written, made by a party in the course of the proceedings in the same case, which does not require proof.

ELEMENTS: It must be made by a party to the case or

his counsel.

It must be made in the course of the proceedings in the same case. and

It can be verbal or written admission. There is no particular form required.

KInds 1. Judicial admission - no proof required and made during the proceedings - can only contest if it was not actually made in the proceedings or there was palpable mistake - conclusive to offerer of admission 2. Extrajudicial admission - are considered as evidence and must be offered as such and it is made outside of court or in a proceeding that is different to the case at hand. - rebuttable - not admissible if self serving unlike judicial and not subject to cross unlike JA

What remedy is available to a party who gives a judicial admission?

ANSWER:

IF THE ADMISSION IS IN WRITING: File a motion to withdraw the pleading or any written instrument containing the admission. IF THE ADMISSION IS ORAL: The counsel of the party may move for the exclusion of the admission.

Withdrawn and now considered as extrajudicial and must now be offered as evidence, they are ordinarily binding and

DNA evidence rule - The DNA Evidence Rule applies whenever DNA evidence is offered, used, or proposed to be offered or used as evidence in all criminal and civil actions as well as special proceedings.

No need for court order and it may be done anytime - not appealable, final and executory, only stopped by injunction by higher court

The right against self-incrimination is applicable only to testimonial evidence. Extracting a blood sample and cutting a strand from the hair of the accused are purely mechanical acts that do not involve his discretion nor require his intelligence.

DNA testing application is not to be construed as an automatic admission into evidence of any component of the DNA evidence that may be obtained as a result thereof

Post conviction dna testing - initiated by prosecution or convicted = the remedy if found to be favorable to him is habeas corpus to the court of origin then penalty is reversed or modified by the court then Requisites RED 1. Existence of biological date 2. Sample is relevant 3. The result could lead to modification of decision

Rule of inclusion = includes and so need percentage significane Rule of exclusion - excluded and conclusive Inconclusive due to degradation of dna

Testimonial evidence - person taking witness stand is presumed qualified EXCEPTIONS: There is prima facie evidence of incompetency in the following cases: The fact that a person has been recently found of unsound mind by a court of competent jurisdiction; or That a person is an inmate of an asylum for the insane.

Qualifications - POOD 1. can perceive and perceiving 2. can make known their perception to others (Sec. 20, Rule 130) 3. must take either an oath or an affirmation (Sec. 1, Rule 132) 4. must not possess the disqualifications imposed by law or by the rules Religous belief is not a disqualification, same as conviction and having an interest in the outcome of the case But a person convicted of perjury, false testimony, and falsification of document cannot as to wills, convicted of moral turptitude cannot state witness

An opinion is an inference or conclusion based or drawn from the facts established. The opinion of a witness is not admissible. Witnesses must testify to facts within their knowledge and may not state their opinion even on their examination

A witness’s opinion is admissible if it is rationally based on the perception of the witness and helpful to a clear understanding of the witness’s testimony on the determination of the fact in issue.

Disqualifications 1. mental incapacity or immaturity. Cannot make their perceptions intelligently known to others at time of production cannot except lucid interval - children that cannot truthfully, he must show that he understand an oath - feeble mindedness and still can tesify Deaf mutes - Yes, provided: they understand and appreciate the sanctity of an oath and they comprehend the facts they are going to testify on andthey can communicate their ideas through a qualified interpreter 2. by reason of marriage or spousal immunity = this is to preserve the sanctity and confidence of marriage - A husband cannot be examined for or against his wife without her consent; nor a wife for or against her husband without his consent, except in a civil case by one against the other or the latter’s ascendants or descendants or already testimony is outside of marriage Applies only is still married at the time of testimony - it is a right raised by the spouse accused and not a right raised by the spouse witness Requisites A. The spouse for or against whom the testimony is offered is a party to the case. B. The spouses are validly married. (If the marriage is legally dissolved, the privilege no longer applies) C. The testimony is one that is offered during the existence of the marriage. D. The case is not one of the exceptions provided in the rule It does not apply if the marriage is supposedly so strained and it applies to both in favor and not Filial privilege rule = No descendant can be compelled, in a criminal case, to testify against his parents and ascendants. This time exercised by the witness and not the accused

A descendant may not be compelled to testify against his parents notwithstanding Article 215 of the Family Code which allows the compulsion of a descendant to testify against his parents when such testimony is indispensable in a crime against the descendant or by one against the other.

Any conflict between the two provisions should be resolved in favor of the Rules of Court because although found in a substantive law, the Family Code provision is essentially procedural in nature.

3. death or insanity of adverse party or surviving parties rule or dead man’s statute - only the parties who asserts claims cannot testify

Elements The defendant in the case is the executor or or a person of unsound mind.

administrator or representative of a deceased person

The subject matter of the action is a claim or demand against the estate of a deceased person or a person of unsound mind.

The testimony pertains to any matter of fact occurring before the death of such deceased person or before such person became of unsound mind. - a partnership is a separate juridical personality

Reason for the rule To guard against the temptation to give false testimony in regard to the the part of the surviving party and to discourage perjury.

transaction in question on

To protect the estate from fictitious claims, and to discourage perjury.

4. privileged communication- information which one person derives from another because of a confidential relationship existing between the parties. Upon grounds of public policy, the parties to such privileged communications are made incompetent, by law, to testify to such communications.

Kinds 1. Husband and wife privilege or marital privilege - refers to communications made during the marriage - it can be invoked during or after the marriage Requisites There is a valid marriage. The privilege is invoked with respect to a confidential communication between the spouses during their marriage. The spouse against whom such evidence is being offered has not given his consent to such testimony.

Not applicable 1. in a civil case by one against the other. 2. in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latter’s direct ascendants or descendants.

Also to third persons to overhear the communication except when it was disclosed to him due to collusion

Main distinction is total prohibition/only confidential and raise only if applicable

2 lawyer-client privilege Requisites A. existence of attorney-client relation. B. the privilege is invoked with respect to a confidential communication between them in the course of professional employment. C. the client has not given his consent to the attorney’s testimony; or if the attorney’s secretary, stenographer or clerk is sought to be examined, both the client and the attorney have not given their consent.

Not applicable on PPOAT A. intended to be made public. B. intended to be communicated to others. C. intended for an unlawful purpose. D. received from third persons not acting in behalf or as agents of the client. E. made in the presence of third parties who are strangers to the attorney-client relationship.

Test of existence - if information is acquired due to seeking services or advice whether or not there would be an expected litigation or not

It is a privilege benefiting and invoked by the client or waived by him and a judge is still a lawyer - it can no longer invoke if he were the one to raise such privilege or use it as his defense

3. Doctor patient privilege - A person authorized to practice medicine, surgery or obstetrics cannot in a civil case, without the consent of the patient, be examined as to any information which he may have acquired in attending such patient in professional capacity, which information was necessary to enable him to act in that capacity, and which would blacken the character of the patient. REQUISITES: The action involves a CIVIL case. RANB 

The relation of doctor and patient existed between the person claiming the privilege or his legal representative and the doctor.



The advice or treatment given by him or any information was acquired by the physician while professionally attending to the patient.



The information was necessary for the performance of his professional duty.



The disclosure of the information would tend to blacken the reputation of the patient.

Patient in life, not terminated by death, and it would blacken reputation, not needed for proper treatment Not applicable A. Not made in confidence B. Irrelevant to physician’s professional employment C. For an unlawful purpose D. Intended to be made public E. Waived without objection 4. Priest and penitent - not applicable if not penitential in character - no remorse - such as confession to commit a crime Requisites A. The confession must have been made to the priest or minister in his professional capacity according to the discipline of the church to which the priest or minister belongs. B. The communication made must be confidential and must be penitential in character. e.g., under the seal of the confessional.

5. Public officers - applies during holding of office and afterwards Requisites A. The communication must have been made to a public officer. B. The communication was given to the public officer in official confidence. C. The public interest would suffer by the disclosure of the communication.

The privilege is NOT applicable if what is asked: IREGI is useful evidence to vindicate the innocence of an accused. lessen the risk of false testimony. is essential to the proper disposition of the litigation. the benefit to be gained by a correct disposition of the litigation was greater than any injury which could inure to the relation by a disclosure of the information.

EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE refers to certain types of information like military, diplomatic, and other national security matters which may be withheld from the public because of their sensitive nature.

Other privileged communication are guardian ad litem in relation to ward unless the court finds it is in the ward’s best interest, voter cannot be compelled to disclose who they voted for, publishers and writer in terms of source 1477, trade secrets unless indispensable to doing justice

Bank deposits are absolutely confidential in nature, except upon written permission of the depositor, or in cases of impeachment, or upon lawful order of a competent court. (RA 1405; Francisco, p. 335, 1992 ed.)

Conciliators, mediators and similar officials shall not testify in any court or body regarding any matter taken up at the conciliation proceedings conducted by them. (Art. 233, Labor Code)

Informers, for the protection of their identity, cannot be compelled to testify by the prosecutor when their testimony would merely be cumulative and corroborative. (Herrera, Vol. V, p. 353, 1999 ed.)

Examination of witnesses

Right and obligations of witnesses A. To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or insulting questions, and from harsh or insulting demeanor. B. Not to be detained longer than the interests of justice require. C. Not to be examined except only as to matters pertinent to the issue. D. Not to give an answer which will tend to subject him to a penalty for an offense. (right against self-incrimination)

The judge may allow someone to remain quiet if there is reasonable possibility that he will incriminate himself

Kinds of immunity 1. Use immunity - immunity for whatever manner his testimony may be used 2. Transactional immunity - protection only for the case that compelled his testimony

Right against self incrimination applies only to testimonial compulsion and not mechanical acts An accused cannot be subpoenad or compelled at all while an ordinary witness may be and he may only raise the right upon such a question

Testimony is incriminating if it ties a witness to the commission of a crime or would furnish a lead to evidence tying the witness to a crime. The privilege against compelled self-incrimination can be claimed at any proceeding, whether civil or criminal, at which the witness’s appearance and testimony are compelled.

The right may also be raised if there is risk of resulting criminal prosecution and not possible embarrassment - it has to be a subject of inquiry

Right against self degradation = a tendency to degrade

Applies only to natural persons and not to a conviction

Refusal to take the stand Is not allowed Exception A. When he is the accused B. In a civil case and he is the defendent and the nature of proceedings is criminal in nature A witness admitted under the witness program CANNOT refuse to testify or give evidence for the prosecution of the offense or offenses for which he has been admitted into the program on the ground of constitutional right against self-incrimination. However, he enjoys immunity from criminal prosecution and cannot be subjected to any penalty or forfeiture for any transaction, matter or thing concerning his compelled testimony or evidence.

State witness is allowed if GOTGCN A. The offense to be benefitted by his testimony is a grave felony in the revised penal code or special laws B. His testimony Is necessary for the prosecution C. there is no other direct evidence available for the proper prosecution of the offense committed. D. his testimony can be substantially corroborated on its material points. E. he does not appear to be the most guilty. F. he has not at any time been convicted of any crime involving moral turpitude.

Order of examination of witness 1. Direct examination - to elicit facts - examination in chief of a witness by a witness presenting him on facts relevant to the issue 2. Cross examination - to test accuracy, truthfullness and if free from any bias or interest - it is to impeach a testimony’s credibility, the witness itself, to gain admissions and clarify 3. Re-direct examination - to explain answers given in the cross and questions not asked in cross may only be allowed upon court’s discretion - it is also to explain contradicitions and inconsistency 4. Re-cross examination = to rebut damaging redirect examination = only to those asked in the redirect unless court allows further

Scope of cross

ENGLISH RULE: If a witness is called to testify to a particular fact, he becomes a witness for all purposes and may be fully cross-examined upon all matters material to the issue, the examination not being confined to the matters inquired about in the direct examination. AMERICAN RULE: Cross-examination is restricted to facts and circumstances which are connected with the matters that have been stated in the direct examination of the witness.

Generally english rule is to be applied unless the excused is crossed or a hostile witness then american rule applies

If the witness was partially cross-examined, but died before the completion of his cross-examination, his testimony on direct may be stricken out but only with respect to the testimony not covered by the cross-examination. (People v. Señeris, G.R. No. L-48883, Aug. 6, 1980)

The absence of a witness is not sufficient to warrant the striking out of his testimony for failure to appear for further cross-examination where the witness has already been sufficiently cross-examined, and the matter on which cross-examination is sought is not in controversy.

Is the party who offered the testimony of a witness bound by the testimony? GENERAL RULE: Yes. EXCEPTIONS: When the witness is the: AUHF adverse party; hostile witness; unwilling witness; or a forced witness.

A witness may be considered as unwilling or hostile only if so declared by the court upon adequate showing of his adverse interest, unjustified reluctance to testify or his having misled the party into calling him to the witness stand.

A leading question is one which suggests to the witness the answer which the examining party desires. It is not allowed except: so long as not suggesting an answer or a specific thing = CPUAI 

On cross-examination. - because expected to be adversarial and hostile



On preliminary matters.



When there is difficulty in getting direct and intelligible answers from a witness who is ignorant, or a child of tender years, or is of feeble mind or a deaf-mute.



To unwilling witness or hostile witness.



Witness is an adverse party or an officer, director, or managing agent of a public or private corporation or of a partnership or association which is an adverse party.

Doctrine of incomplete testimony = testimony cannot be done or completed due to causes attributable to the party who offered the witness then the incompetent testimony is stricken off the record Exception = prosecution witness crossed extensively and thereafter fails to appear and so cannot be produced despite a warrant of arrest

Death or absence of witness after direct examination - direct shall remain if the cross failed to take place due to causes attributable to the crosser despite the witness being readily available - considerd waived If partially crossed - then direct shall be stricken out but only the portion that was not crossed Cannot stricken if all material points have already been covered

Recalling of witness - needs leave of court - judicial discretion Recall a matter of right in and after showing concrete and substantial ground for recall A. Examination has not concluded B. Recall was reserved with approval by the court A question that merely suggests a subject without suggesting an answer or a specific thing is not a leading question. A leading question is one which suggests to the witness the answer which the examining party desires. It is not allowed except on cross-examination and on preliminary matters.

A misleading question is one which assumes as true a fact not yet testified to by the witness, or contrary to that which he has previously stated. It is not allowed, unless it is validly waived or when asking hypothetical questions to an expert witness

Impeachment of an adverse party = during cross and it is to remove credibility Methods of impeachment CPR 1. By contradictory evidence - Contradictions in his previous testimony or evidence presented by him in the same case 2. By evidence that the witness’ general reputation for truth, honesty, or integrity is bad. - Since the weight of the witness’ testimony depends on his credibility, he may be impeached by impairing his credibility by showing his not pleasing reputation but only as regards his reputation for truth, honesty or integrity

3. By prior inconsistent statements. (“laying the predicate“) to give him opportunity to explain statements, oral or documentary, inconsistent but not in the same trial - procedure 1. The witness must be confronted with such statements with the circumstances of the time, place, and persons present in which they were made; 2. The witness must be asked whether he made such statements, and if so, allowed to explain them; and 3. If the statement is in writing, it must be shown to the witness before any question is put to him concerning them. f the previous statements of a witness are offered as evidence of an admission, and not merely to impeach him, the rule on laying the predicate does not apply.

Laying the foundation refers to best evidence rule. Secondary evidence

Other modes of impeachment = IIIBM 1. By showing the improbability or the

unreasonableness of the testimony;

2. By showing bias, prejudice, and hostility; 3. By prior inconsistent acts or conduct; 4. By showing social connections, occupation, and manner of living; or 5. By showing interest.

GENERAL RULE: A witness may not be impeached by evidence of particular wrongful acts. EXCEPTION: 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.

Evidence of good moral character of a witness is generally not admissible unless such character has been impeached. Exception further Yes. A criminal defendant who takes the stand puts her credibility in issue the same as any other witness; thus, she may be impeached by proof of prior conviction of a crime. About estafa Susan cannot even invoke the right against self-incrimination because the question is not even directed to any matter on which she can be incriminated.

HIs own witness - he may not impeach his own Except

A. unwilling or adverse witness so declared by the court; B. adverse party; or C. officer of the adverse party who is a juridical person.