Rule 128

Defedant to be declared in default vs as in default ?

Overview of Moya’s Lecture
Revised rules on evidence took effect on May 1, 2020 As in default

The Rules of Court in the U.S are in enacted by Congress therefore, 1.failure to file an answer
the rules of Court in US are substantitive law and not procedural law. 2. Failure to file a pre-trial brief

What is now the state of the art of our Evidence and Civil Pro ? In default failure to Appear in court

In consti the SC is given the power to enact rules but under the civil Section 3 Judicial Notice when hearing necessary
code the Rules of Court has for and effect of law.
Additional- Pretria and Motu Proprio
128-
Imputed and where not in fact made.
Section 1 National government
When there is a judical admission need not be proven in court.
Section 3 Admissibility of Evidence - Constitution
Admission in the Sandiganbayan of Marcos’ admission during the trial
Sections 2 and 4 no addition in SB.

129 What need not prove Section 130 1001,1002,1003

Section 1- National Government 3.

4.
There is no more best evidence rule it is now the ORIGINAL 5.
DOCUMENT RULE 6.
Because to say that the best evidence to be presented is misleading,
New provision on Summaries- Catch all provision section 7 federal rule
Section 4 on Judicial Admission additiona provision (oral, written, when 1006
imputed)
Section of 24 Disqualification by reason of privilege communication
Two types of Judicial Admission
Lawyer- Client privielege communication- The crime fraud , breach of
1. When in pleading duty of atty by cilent, joint client, document attested by lawyer, money
claim to the decedent client.
No specific denial only negative denial- THEN THERE IS ONLY
NEGATIVE PREGANANT ADMISSION
The disqualification rule applies only to future crimes not to previous Section 39 Statement of decedent or of person of unsound mind 601
claim under the concept of Crime fraud privilege may be divulged. competency to testify in general.

Physician- patient what is added is the psychotherapist and Section of 40 Declaration against interest Federal Rules 804 when the
pyschologist. declarant is unavailable as witness.

Section 26 privilege relating to trade secrets FR 508 Section 43 803 Regardless if declarant is available as witness. The
testimony can be reduced into writing.
Air Philippines vs Pens well an employer working for a laboratory
company was asked to sign a waiver in the event that you resign you Section 44 part of Resgestae 803 Not dying declaration then it is res
are not allowed to divulge the secret. gestae. That the person is in the verge of excitement and utterances.

Cocoland vs NLRC what was divulge by the employee is privilege Section 45 Records of regularly conducted activity 803
communication and was said to be a ground of dismissal.
Yellow pages considered as regularly conducted activities? Yes, since
Section 28 408 -410 Offer of compromise in crim case implied it has been used and been proven as accurate in decades.
admission of guilt as distinguished in civil cases this is not a sign of
guilt you’ll be referred to mediation. UNDER THE NEW RULES Section 50 If it will not qualify it may now fall under the Residual
MEDIATION IS NO LONGER MANDATORY BUT DISCRETIONARY. exception lagareng hapon- If it the circumstances will not qualify in
other hearsay exception it will qualify under residual exception.
If there is failure in JDR it will be unloaded to the judge and then re
raffled under the new rules it is no longer the same. Section 54 other witnesses even criminals and other felons may be a
witness.
Exception to offer of comprise
Character evidence not generally admissible. Convicted punish for
GN Offer of Compromise is an admission of guilt. more than 1 year crime involving moral turpitude character may be
attacked. If you are granted
XPN: Quasi offenses under 365 of the revised penal code.
Section 131- Burden of proof vs burden of evidence
Section 37 Hearsay
Burden of Proof never shifts while burden of evidence never shifts
Prior to the amendmennt there is no exact provision on hearsay. The
only written rule about hearsay is that if a person personal knowledge Who allege must prove.
that’s hearsay.
If the accused pleads self defense then the burden of proof will now
Under Section 37 there is now the definition of Hearsay then it is called shift. A person whose act is justified he will not be criminally and civilly
the First Hand Knowledge Rule. 801,805,806 liable.
Section 5 Presumptions in criminal action and proceedings. Vesting order 89 it emanates from the real personal properties of the
second world war
Criminal Presumption- Land in Sta. Mesa

132 Presentation of Evidence 40 Sections Ei incumbit probation qui dicit, non qui negat – He who alleges must
prove
Section 12 impeachment by evidence of conviction of a crime. The
crime committed involving moral turpitude. XPN Pardon & Amnesty Philippine orthopedic center owned formerly by Japanese vesting order
no. P-89
Section 15 Seperation and Exclusion of witness prior to amendent the
new term is MOTION FOR SEQUESTRATION

Under the new rules during the trial the attorney can now be Section 1. Evidence- is the means, sanctioned by these rules, of
sequestered from his client under the new rules is now proscribed. ascertaining in a judicial proceedings the truth respecting a matter of
fact. (Trial facts not of law only the SC can interpret laws with finality).
Procedural rule shall be given retroactive effect in so far as the
pending incident is concerned.
As far as facts are concerned it is the real of RTC, CA, and SB while
Rule 133 8 Sections questions of law passed upon by SC rule 40-45 RTC is now exercising
appellate jurisidction
Section 5 weight to be given opinion of an expert witness how
determined. Rule 23-28 43 quasi judicial
44 CA
1. Educational attainment 45 procedure in SC
2. Experience gained by EW
3. Cases testified to and reach the SC SC- Purely question of law? Questions of facts and law?
4. Does the expert have been subjected by his peers
5. Opinion by others been cited by experts and SC Questions of facts and law SC
CA dismissed if purely questions of law.
Narrative and opinion. As a rule an ordinary witness cannot give his
opinion In quasi judicial proceedings it only applies in suppletory effect
People vs Pruna 1. Santity 2. Acquainted to him provided for by the IRR.

General Principles -Evidence is the means from which an inference may logically be
drawn as to the existence of a fact that which makes evidence or plain.
He who allege must prove
-To be admissible an evidence must be relevant and competent.
Factum Probandum and Factum Probans Admissibility- best thought of as a concept consisting two different
aspects
Factum-Facts
1. Disclosure of the trier of facts
Factum Probandum is the fact to be proved; a fact which is in issue, 6. Implied permission to present evidence
and to which evidence is to be directed.
Kinds of Admissibility
Factum Probans is the evidentiary fact; a fact subsidiary or connected
fact tending to prove the principal fact in issue; a piece of 1. Conditional Admissibility- The evidentiary rule that when a piece
circumstantial evidence. Evidentiary Fact of evidence is not itself admissible, but is admissible if certain other
facts make it relevant, the evidence becomes admissible on
Section 2 The rules of evidence shall be the same in all courts and in condition that counsel later introduce the connecting facts.
all trials and hearings except as otherwise provided by law or these
rules. 2. Curative Admissibility- The rule that an inadmissible piece of
evidence may be admitted if offered to cure or counteract the effect of
Civil law cases- Preponderance of evidence. There is no presumption some similar piece of opponent’s evidence that itself should not have
in favor of any party. EVIDENCE GREAT. been admitted.

Criminal law cases- Guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The presumption 3. Limited Admissibility- The principle that testimony or exhibit may
is that an accused is innocent until found otherwise. be admitted into evidence for a restricted purpose. (i.e statements
impeaching a witness but not to establish the truth)
Administrative cases- the required quantum of proof is substantial
evidence. RIGHT TO COUNSEL NOT ABSOLUTE ANG TIBAY VS 4.. Multiple Admissibility- The evidentiary rule that although a piece
NLRC of evidence is inadmissible under one rule for the purpose given in
offering it, it is nevertheless admissible if relevant and offered for some
Right to Counsel cannot be demanded as a matter of Right Cudia vs other purpose not forbidden by the rules.
Executive Secretary
Two Universal accepted principles of Admissibility (School of
Section 3- The added word is the word CONSTITUTION. Thoughts)

The word constitution was added because of the exclusionary 1. First, that none but facts having rational probative value are
rule doctrine stating that all evidence gathered in violation on the admissible.
rule on the fruit of the poisonous tree it is inadmissible in
evidence. 7. Second, that all facts having rational probative value are
admissible unless some specific rule forbids their admission.
Admissibilitty of Evidence- evidence is admissible when it is relevant Everything having a probative value is ipso facto entitled to the
to the issue and is not excluded by the Constitution or these rules. assumption that it is admissible, and that therefore any rule of of
 policy which may be valid to exclude it is a super added and -Matters offered in evidence must be relevant to the issues of the case
abnormal rule. and must tend to establish or disprove them. The principle is applicable
to the use of books, papers and records as evidence and to the use of
You object during direct examination pertaining to questions real or demonstrative evidence as well as oral testimony.
answerable by yes or no.
-Facts and circumstances which afford reasonable interference or
One word Cross examination- The witness is there to affirm or deny throw light upon the matter or matters contested are admissible in
your question because in direct examination there is only a story teller evidence, unless the exclusions of any such fact or circumstance is
and the counsel is the narrator. required by some established principle of evidence.

Direct examination now useless because of JUDAFF rule. Sufficiency of evidence required- The evidence having probative value
on the said issue is said to be not enough. The evidence must be
Relevance- When evidence has such a relation to the fact in issue as sufficiently connected and tied with the facts in issue must not be
to induce belief in its existence or non existence it is said to be merely relevant. There must be actual connection shown with the
relevant. transaction involve or the parties thereto.

Competent -When evidence is not excluded by law or by the Rules, it -Rules of evidence are principles of selectivity and exclusion. These
is said to be competent. Principles seek to limit the evidence presented to the court to the most
dependable and likely to the facts available in order to avoid raising too
Classification of Admissibility (Probative policy) many issues or delay a proceeding.

1. The first group of rules deals with probative value of specific facts. Admissibility vs Probative weight
It attempts to define for legal purposes the value sufficient to entitle
a fact to be regarded as evidential. LOGIC AND INTERFERENCE Admissibility of Evidence- Refers to the question of whether or not
AS APPLIED TO EXPERIENCE. the circumstance is to be considered at all.

8. The second group include artificial rules, which do not profess Probative value of evidence refers to the question of whether or not it
probative value but aim at increasing or safeguarding it. (Hearsay proves an issue.
rule, quantity, rule of the oath).
A particular item of evidence may be admissible, but its evidentiary
6. The third group of rules cover those, which rest extrinsic policies weight depends on judicial evaluation within the guidelines provided by
irrespective or probative value. To exclude certain kinds of facts, the rules of evidence.
these rules involve extrinsic policies which override the policy of
permitting all available means to ascertain the truth. EXTRINSIC Webb vs People and People vs Marcos Shooting Nalundasan
POLICY. impossible to testify because of physical impossibility.

Elementary Rule of Evidence Case cited: Heris of Lourdes Sabapan vs Comorposa and PNoc
Shipping and Transport vs CA
The following were held as distinctions between Admissibility and Section 4- Relevancy; Collateral matters- Evidence must have such
Probative value a relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its existence or non-
existence. Evidence on collateral matters shall not be allowed except
a. Admissibility of Evidence refers to the question of whether or not when it tends in any reasonable degree to establish the probability or
the circumstances is to be considered at all. improbability of a fact in issue.

b. On the other hand, the Probative Value of evidence refers to the Relevancy of Evidence- refers to the probative value in relation to the
question of whether or not it proves an issue. This, a letter may be purpose for which it is offered.
offered in evidence and admitted as such but its evidentiary weight
depends upon the observance of rules on evidence. Collateral matter- Any matter on which evidence could not have been
introduced for a relevant purpose. As a rule evidence on collateral
In Atienza vs Board of Medicine, et. al., the Court held that it is matters shall not be allowed, EXCEPT, when it tends in any
better to admit and consider evidence for determination than to reasonable degree to establish the probability or improbability of the
outrightly reject it based on very rigid technical grounds. fact in issue. So long as it can be Corroborated it can be admitted.

Note: Other form of evidence may likewise be presented in order to In order for a collateral matter to be admissible the fact must be the
prove legal relationship other than documentary evidence. natural, necessary or logical connection of the ultimate fact in issue.

Preponderance of evidence- The rule requires that the consideration In Herrera vs Alba: The Court held that as regards to the probative
of all the facts and circmustances of the cases, regardless of whether value of DNA analysis as evidence the court should be cautious in
they are object, documentary or testimonial when the trier of facts is giving credence to DNA analysis as evidence.
led to find that the existence of the contested fact is more probable
than its non-existence. Evidence Great. In People vs Vallejo the court held that in considering a DNA
evidence the following must be observed:

Tabuada vs Tabuada- The mere discrepancy perceived by the CA 1. How the samples were collected
between the name of the deceased entered in the death certificate of 10. How the samples were handled
Loreta Yulo Tabuada and the name of the title holder Loreta H. 7. The possibility of contamination of the samples
Tabuada did not necessarily belie or disprove the legal relationship 8. The procedures followed in analyzing the samples
between Sofia Tabuada and late Loreta Tabuada. 9. Whether the proper standards and procedures were followed in
conducting the tests
Poe Llamanzares vs Comelec- disputable presumption that things 10. The qualification of analysis who conducted the test
have happened according to the ordinary course of nature and the
ordinary habits of life base on the statistics provided by the NSC. The
statistical probability presented by the NSC is admissible in evidence Dual Purpose of Relevancy
and has probative value under Rule 128 of the ROC.
1. To restrain the field of inquiry to its proper scope and to prevent the
issues from becoming beclouded. Judicial Notice when Mandatory
2. To prevent surprise of a litigant or the subjection of a party to the
necessity of meeting evidence possibly prejudicial and the Rule 129- Section 3 The added provision is that even during the pre-
character of which he has no means of anticipating. trial matters sought to be take judicial notice may be heard. The old
rule provided that matters sought to be taken judicial notice of may
Admitting an Irrelevant evidence- Evidence may be admissible where take place during trial without mentioning pre-trial.
although it is irrelevant when standing alone; it is or may be expected
to become relevant in connection with other evidence, or where it With the amendment using the word “shall” from “may” connotes the
forms a cling in the chain of evidence necessary to support a party’s desire of the court to make mandatory judicial notice at anytime before
contention. the judgement and even in appeal.

Rule 129 What need not be proved. Judicial Notice is mandatory in the following:

Section 1 Judicial Notice- The new rule clarifies that only the official 1. Existence and territorial extent of states
acts of the legislative, executive and judicial departments of the 15. Political History
national government are those subject of mandatory judicial notice. 11. Forms of government and symbols of nationality
12. The laws of nations (forms part of the law of the land public and
Consequently, the legislative, executive and judicial acts of the local international law)
government units are not subject of mandatory judicial notice. 13. The admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their seals. (we
participate in the law of the admirality)
Judicial notice is cognizance of certain facts that judges may properly 14. The political constitution and history of the Philippine
take and act on without proof because these fact are already known to 15. The official acts of the legislative executive and judicial
them. It is the duty of the court to assume something as a matter of departments of the Philippines.
fact without the need of further evidentiary support.
Passport- Best evidence of nationality (governor of palawan)
In Republic vs Rosario the court stated that: Section 1, Rule 129 of 1. Malolos
the Rules of Court mandates that a court shall take judicial notice , 2. 1935
without the introduction of evidence, of the official acts of the 3. 1973
legislative, executive, and judicial departments of the Philippines. This 4. 1986
case pertains to UP’s indefeasible title over its land holdings. The RTC 5. 1987
and CA erred when it required UP to present the CTC of its title. The
SC reminded the lower courts of the rule on Stare Decisis.
The 1987 constitution took effect on february 2 1987 pursuant to the
In CIR vs Insular life Assurance co. The court held that it is desirable case of De Leon vs Esguerra
and necessary that when a court has laid down a principle of law it will Official acts of the legislative
adhere to that principle and apply it to all future cases in which the
facts are substantially the same. Congress- Lawss passed by congress
Executive- Executive acts and IRR Proof of Evidence may be dispensed in two situations

Judiciary- Cases decided by the court be it en banc or per division 1. Where the opponent by a solemn or infrajudicial admission has
waived the dispute this is considered judicial admission.
WON Hearsay evidence is admissible during preliminary investigation?
2. Where the court is justified by general considerations in declaring
Yes, because what the prosecution wants is only probability of guilt so the truth of the proposition without requiring evidence from the
long as substantive evidence will be proven then hearsay evidence will party. This is the processes called Judicial Notice.
be admitted.
Requisites of Judicial Notice
Atienza vs Board of Medicine- Kidneys of people are within its
anatomical position of a person may be taken judicial notice. The doctrine of Judicial Notice rests on the wisdom and discretion of
the courts the power to take judicial notice is to be exercised by courts
with caution; care must be taken that the requisite notoriety exists; and
Judicial Departments- Decisions of the Supreme Court either every reasonable doubt on the subject should be promptly resolved in
promulgated by a division or en banc. the negative.

In Suplico vs Neda(Judicial Notice of acts of the executive) It is Based on the principle of convenience and expediency
mandatory and the Court has no alternative but to take judicial notice
of the official acts of the President of the Philippines, who heads the Lex Non Requirit Verification Quod Curae- the law does not require
executive branch of our government. The Court must take judicial to be verified which is apparent to the court
notice of such official act without need of evidence.
Quod Constat Claret No debet virificare- What is clearly apparent
In David vs Macapagal- Arroyo- The court took judicial notice of PP need not be proved
no. 1017 banning all rallies and canceling all permits for public
assemblies. Quod constat curae oere testium non idget- That which appears to
the court need not the aid of witness
Note: Ordinances are not included in the enumeration of matters
covered by mandatory judicial notice under Section 1, Rule 129 of the
Rules of Court. Three material Requisites

Duty of a party who wants the court to take Judicial Notice of 1. The matter must be of common and general knowledge
Municipal ordinances 21. It must be well and authoritatively settled
16. It must be within the limits of the jurisdiction of the court.
The party asking the court to take judicial notice is obligated to supply
the court with the full text of the rules the party desires it to have notice Note: Public record and notoriety
of.
Judicial Knowledge- Cognizance of certain facts which a judge under
the rules of legal procedure or otherwise may properly take or act upon In Maquiling vs Comelec the Court held that it cannot take judicial
without proof. notice of a foreign law cited as reference by a party in the pleadings.
Such foreign law must be presented as public documents of a foreign
Judicial Cognizance- taken only of those matters that are commonly country and must be evidenced by an official publication thereof. Mere
known. reference to a foreign law in a pleading does not suffice for it to be
considered in deciding a case.

Note: The mere personal knowledge of the judge is not the judicial Section 2 Judicial Notice when discretionary- A court may take
notice knowledge of the court. and he is not authorized to make his judicial notice of matters which are of public knowledge, or are capable
individual knowledge of the fact not generally or professionally known. of unquestionable demonstration, or ought to be known to judges
because of their judicial functions.
Note: Courts cannot take judicial notice on matters appearing in the
website. Note: It is common knowldge that if a person is born as bingi automatic
he is also pipi. Hence, it is discretionary.
Requisites for notoriety

Expert travel & Tours vs CA- The Principal guide in determining what
facts may be assumed to be judicially known of that of notoriety. In Magdalo vs Comelec the Court defined discretionary judicial notice
as matters having probative value to evidence commonly acceptable
Not possible by to be a subject to a reasonable dispute that is either by reasonably prudent men and to take notice of judicially cognizable
facts.
1. Generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court
2. Capable of accurate and ready determination by resorting to Judicial Notice in Rape cases- the scene of rape is not always nor
sources whose accuracy cannot be reasonably questionable necessarily isolated or secluded for lust knows no time and place.

Note: Foreign laws cannot be given judicial notice in the Philippines. Note: Generally, courts are not authorized to take judicial notice of the
They can only given persuasive effect. contents of the records of other cases even when the same cases are
pending in the same court. The following are the exceptions to such
Note: Decisions, rules, and laws in United States are only given rule
persuasive effect. But if the rule was copied from the federal rules then
decisions of the US will have a direct effect in the Philippines. 1. The parties present them in evidence absent any opposition from
the other party
23. The court in its discretion resolves to do so.
In Atienza vs Board of Medicine the Court held that courts can take
judicial notice that the kidneys of a person were both in the proper (Problem 1 Page 69 of book)
anatomical locations at the time of operation is covered by judicial
notice. Hearing Necessary
 1. During Trial
What do you do if you want the court to take judicial notice? 2. Submission of pleadings
File a motion to take judicial notice of a matter and than attached a Judicial Admissions are those made in court by a person’s attorney
copy of the original copy of the ordinance as certified by the for the purpose of being used as a substitute for a regular legal
Sanggunian Secretary. evidence of facts at the trial. Such as those made voluntarily by a
party, which appear on record in the proceedings of the court.
Note: Under the new rules motion whether litigous or not need not be
set for hearing because it is the court will set it hearing. Judicial admissions made by a party in the course of the proceedings
are conclusive and do not require proof.
Pemberton vs Laude
Judicial admissions in criminal cases- stipulation of facts entered into
In Silkair vs CIR it was held that hearing is needed so that the parties by the prosecution and defense during trial which later on reduced into
may be heard to prove a matter as decisive and material in the case. writing and contained in the official transcript is equivalent to judicial
admission.
(Problem no 2 page 70-71)
Unless there is
Courts taking judicial notice of matters pending before another court
1. Palpable mistake
As a GENERAL RULE Courts cannot take judicial notice of matters 25. No such admission was made
pending before another court.
Exception: Any admission or stipulations made in open court are conclusive and
binding on the part of the declarant.
1. The parties present them in evidence absent any opposition from
the party In Alfelor vs Halasan the court ruled that a party who judicially admits
24. The court in its discretion resolves to do so. a fact cannot later challenge the facts as judicial admissions are a
waiver of proof.
Clearly interwoven cases.
NOTE: ADMISSION OF COUNSEL IS ADMISSION OF THE CLIENT
Rule 129 Section 4 Judicial admissions- The phrasing was changed
but the meaning of the rule remains the same. Exceptions to the Conclusiveness of Judicial admissions and
Dispensation of proof
Section 4- Judicial admissions- Any admission oral or written made
by the party in the course of the proceedings in the same case, does 1. When it is shown that an admission as made through palpable
not require proof. The admission may be contradicted only by showing mistake
that it was made through palpable mistake or that the imputed 26. When it was shown that no admission was in fact made
admission was not in fact, made.
Note: Attachments to the complaint may be considered as evidence A. Object Real Evidence
although they were not introduced as such.
Section 1 Object as evidence- object as evidence are those
In Asia Banking Corp vs Walter E. Olsen the court stated that addressed to the senses of the court. When an object is relevant
documents attached to the complaint are considered a part thereof and to the fact in issue, it may be exhibited, to examined or viewed by
may be considered as evidence although they were not introduce as the court.
such.
Can a blind be a witness to a rape case?
Note: Judicial admissions in pleadings such as answer of a party to a
case constitute a judicial admission which are legally binding in then. Yes, because he still have other senses such as smell, hearing, and
senses.
Note: Attachments to the complaint may be considered as evidence
although they were not introduce as such. Should the prosecutor present the body of a murdered person in
a murder case?

Instances when a party can make judicial admissions No, you should present the death certificate and medical certificate

1. In the pleadings filed by the parties Object Evidence- Anything which comes within the cognizance or
27. In the course of the trial, either by verbal or written manifestation or scrutiny of the senses, especially anything tangible or visible. That
stipulation which is perceived, known, thought, of or signified, that toward which a
17. In other stages of the judicial proceeding as in the pre-trial cognitive act is directed.

Effects on Judicial admissions in pleadings such as answer of a People vs Sorin: The presentation of the drugs which constitute the
party to a case corpus delicti of the crime calls for the necessity of proving with moral
certainty that they are the same seized items.
In Mactan Rock Industries Inc et al. vs Germo the Hight court held
that statements in the answer made by a party constitute judicial Purpose of Chain of Custody Rule in Drug Cases
admissions which are legally binding on them.
The chain of custody requirement aims to ensure that the integrity and
Consequence of Judicial admission evidentiary value of the seized items are preserved so much so that
doubts as to the identity of the evidence are removed. Time of
In Gubatanga vs Badoy the Court held that it is Hornbook doctrine possession, tested until it was offered.
that a judicial admission binds the person who makes the same, and
absent ant showing that this was made through palpable mistake no Note: The effects of failure to follow the chain of custody rule is fatal to
amount of rationalization can offset it. the prosecution there can be no crime of illegal possession when the
doubts persist on whether the item confiscated was the prohibited
Rule 130- Rules of Admissibility Sections 1-54 drug.
Note: An accused may still be found guilty of the of RA 9165 despite Recording- consists of letters, words, numbers, or their equivalent
failure to faithfully observe the provision of section 21 for as long as the recorded in any manner.
chain of custody remain unbroken.
Photograph- means a photographic image or its equivalent stored in
In People vs Diaz the prosecution was able to establish the necessary any form.
links in the chain of custody of the subject specimen from the time it
was presented during trial as proof of corpus delicti. The Best Evidence Rule before is now the Original Document
Rule

Documentary evidence Section 2 Note: There is no evidence between an unsealed or sealed document.
The seal is a sign that the document was recorded.
Section 2 Documentary evidence- Document as evidence consist
of writings, recordings, photographs, or any material containing Note: To say the best evidence rule is a misnomer therefore,
letters, words, sounds, numbers, figures, symbols, or their misleading.
equivalent, or other modes of written expression offered as poof
of their contents. Photographs includes still pictures, drawings, General Rule the Original Document must be produced. When the
stored images, x-ray films, motion pictures or videos. (1001 A-Z of subject of inquiry is the contents of a document writing, recording,
FRE) photograph or other record no evidence must be admissible.

Documentary Evidence Note: 6 copies signed may still be considered as original because it
was executed simultaneously
A document as an instrument upon which is recorded, by means of
letters figures or marks, matter which may evidentially be used. Exceptions
(writings, words printed, litographed, photographed, to seals plates,
stones) 1. When the original is lost or destroyed or cannot be produced in
court without bad faith on the part of the offeror. -THERE
2 Kinds of Documents SHOULDN’T BE BAD FAITH ON THE PART OF THE OFFEROR

1. Public 2. When the original is in the custody or under the control of the party
2. Private whom the evidence is offered and the latter fails to produce it after
reasonable notice or the original document cannot be obtained by
local processes or procedure. (DUCES TECUM AND
Best Evidence Rule document is any physical embodiment of DEPOSITION)
information or ideas.
3. When the original consist of numerous accounts or other
Writing- Consists of letters, words, numbers or their equivalent set documents which cannot be examined in court without greater loss
down in any form. of time and the fact sought to be established from them is only the
general result of the whole.
 1. The proponent must lay a proper foundation for the admission
4. When the original is a public record in the custody of a public of the original documents on which the summary is based.
officer or is recorded in a public office.(news paper) The proponent must prove that all documents being summarized
are also admissible.
5. When the original is not closely related to a controlling issue.
2. The source of document must likewise be accessible to the
opposing party so that the correctness of the summary may be
tested on cross examination or may be refuted in pleadings. (IN
Note: Video tapes are now considered as photographs. TRIAL THE SUMARY MAY BE ESTABLISHED BY THE
TESTIMONY OF THE PERSON WHO SUMMARIZED THE
The best evidence rule is now the original document rule it applies only DOCUMENT).
when the content of such document is the subject of the inquiry.
Where the issue is only as to whether such document was Party presenting photocopies of the original
actually existing or executed or on the circumstances
surrounding its execution, the best evidence rule does not apply In case lost or destruction the offeror must prove the following before
and testimonial evidence is admissible. the photocopies may be allowed

Note: The original document rule will have no further use if the 1. The existence and due execution of the original
opponent does not bona fide dispute the contents of the document and 6. The loss and destruction of the original or the reason for its non
no other useful purpose will be served by requiring production. production in court
6. The absence of bad faith on the part of the offeror to which the
Note: Fax or photocopy of the marriage contract and the canonical unavailability of the original can be attributed.
certificate of marriage cannot be admitted as evidence of the fact of
marriage between the parties. Note: Photocopy of an unsigned affidavit even if not objected to has no
probative value.
In Calimag vs Heirs of Silvestra N. Macapaz the court held that fax
or photocopy of the marriage contract and the canonical certificate of In Republic vs Mupas the Court did not agree with PIATCO’s
marriage cannot be admitted as evidence of the act of marriage argument that the photocopies of of the supporting documents
between parties. unsigned by Atty. Tolentino as admissible in court. (Hearsay evidence)

In Republic vs Mupas the court can admit the summary of the This case is about the construction of NAIA wherein the contractors
voluminous original document if the party has shown that the made the project using overpriced products and labor.
underlying writings are numerous and that an in-court examination of
these documents would be inconvenient. PIATCO SCANDAL. Note: Hearsay evidence regardless if objected to or not once offered
has no probative value and should be disregarded by the court.
Condition precedent for the admission of the summary of Despite being admitted its value remains to be weak.
numerous documents
In Cudia vs The superintendent of the PMA the Court held that the Computer records rule- Any printout or other output readable by
transcript of records showing excellence in conduct of a student cannot sight, shown to reflect the data accurately is an original.
be considered as evidence for his innocence in an administrative case
against him. RES INTER ALIOS ACTA RULE Photographs- The original of a photograph includes the negative or
any part therefrom.
Section 4- Original of a document
Exceptions to Duplicates
(a) an original of document is the document itself or any counterpart
intended to have the same effect by executing or issuing it. an Xerox Rule- duplicate are generally admissible. This represents a
original of a photograph includes the negative or any print major change from common law, under which the offeror had the
therefrom. If data is stored in a computer or similar device, any burden of establishing an adequate excuse for failing to produce the
printout or other output readable by sight or other means, shown to original before secondary evidence was admissible.
reflect the data accurately is an original.
In sum DUPLICATES are typically admissible as originals.
(b) A duplicate is a counterpart produced by the same impression as
the original or from the same matrix or by means of photography Unless
including enlargements and miniatures or by mechanical or
electronic rerecording or by chemical reproduction or by other 1. A genuine question of authenticity of the original is raised
equivalent techniques which accurately reproduce the original. 8. Fairness requires production of the original

(c) A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as an original unless Duplicate- a counterpart produced by a mechanical, photographic,
1.genuine question is raised as to the authenticity of the original or chemical, electronic or other equivalent process or technique that
2 in the circumstances it is unjust or inequitable to admit the accurately reproduces the original. HAND WRITTEN COPIES ARE
duplicate in lieu of the original. NOT DUPLICATES.

Note: Carbon copy is considered as duplicate original. Note: A counterpart may be original or duplicate depending on the
intent of the person producing it. As a rule a counterpart intended by a
Note: 6 Photocopies considered as original it is treated as duplicate person to be an original must be deemed as an original.
original.
Authenticity Questioned- if there is a question on the authenticity of
Note: If no genuine issue exists as to authenticity and no other reason the original duplicates are not admissible.
exists for requiring the original a duplicate is admissible under the rule.
Unfairness- When only part is reproduced and the remainder is
Original of a writing or recording- is the writing or recording itself or questionable the original must be presented.
any counterpart intended to have the same effect by a person
executing or issuing it. An original or photograph includes the negative Concept of Original Document Rule
or any print therefrom.
In Republic vs Mupas the Court ruled that when the subject of inquiry fails to produce the document, secondary evidence may be presented
relates to the contents of a document, no evidence shall be admissible as in the case of its loss.
other than the original document itself. The original document rule
ensures that the exact contents of a document are brought before the
court.
The usual example of loss or destrcution is in case of fire so long
Rationale for the admission of Secondary evidence of the
contents of the original. as you are not guilty of starting the fire.

Secondary evidence of the contents of writings is admitted on the Section 6 Summaries. — When the contents of documents,
theory that the original cannot be produced by the party who offers the
evidence within a reasonable time by the exercise of reasonable records, photographs, or numerous accounts are voluminous and
diligence. cannot be examined in court without great loss of time, and the
In People vs Sandiganbayan the court held that if the party never fact sought to be established is only the general result of the
objected to the submission of the photostatic copies as evdence , the
whole, the contents of such evidence may be presented in the
production of the original is dispensable.
form of a chart, summary, or calculation.
Secondary Evidence

Section 5- When original document is unavailable. The originals shall be available for examination or copying, of
both, by the adverse party at a reasonable time and place. The
When the original document has been lost or destroyed or cannot
be produced in court, the offeror, upon proof of its execution or court may order that they be produced in court.
existence and the cause of its unavailability without bad faith on
his or her part, may prove its content by a copy or by recital of its This is a new provision introduced in this Revised Rules on
contents in some authentic document, or by the testimony of
witnesses in the order stated. Evidence. (Photograps are now considered as documents.)

The summaries must be presented in the form of summary,

Loss or destruction of the original unless due to bad faith of the
proponent, is a satisfactory explanation for of non-reproduction. caclulation, chart. The summary must be presented as exhibit or

Section 6 When Original Document is in Adverse Party's Custody or through the testimony of the witness. The summary must be
Control. — If the document is in the custody or under the control of the writing, recording, or photograph. IT MUST NOT BE VERBAL
adverse party , he or she must have reasonable notice to produce it. If
after such notice and after satisfactory proof of its existence, he or she statements.
 Note: As a general rule Photocopy of a document cannot be
CHART-SUMMARY- OR CLACULATION- The one who made
admitted in evidence except if it is shown that the original is
such documents must be presented. unavailable.

Exceptions to summaries Certified xerox copies of documents issued by a custodian public

officer is admissible
1. The summary must not encompass verbal statements.
In Bunagan- Bansig vs Calera the court held that xerox copies
Section 8. Evidence admissible when original document is a of marriage contracts issued by a public officer in custody
public record. — When the original of document is in the thereof, are admissible as best evidence of their contents.
custody of public officer or is recorded in a public office, its
contents may be proved by a certified copy issued by the Inferior evidence to the original is also termed as MEDIATE
public officer in custody thereof. EVIDENCE- MEDIATE TESTIMONY OR SUBSTITUTIONARY
EVIDENCE.
Even if the summaries are already submitted and inspected the
original may still be examined in court. Two types of document

Note: In election cases the PROTESTANT has the right to General rule: all documents issued by national, local
photocopy the ballots and then make a summary. government including GOCCs are public documents all others
are private documents.
Note: Since we already copied the main provisions of the revised
rules to the US foreign jurisprudence in US must no longer be Exception- Notarized documents
merely persuasive but also binding since we only copy these
provisions in US. If asked if we can site us rulings this must be Section 9. Party who calls for document not bound to offer
the view. it. — A party who calls for the production of a document and
inspects the same is not obliged to offer it as evidence.
When Secondary Evidence is admissible
Under the rule, the fact that a party calls for the production of a writing
In Dantis vs Maghinang, Jr. it was held that: A secondary does not oblige susch party to offer the same as evidence. Said party
evidence is admissible only upon compliance with Rule 130, has the discretion whether or not to present the produced writing as
Section 5. Accordingly, the offeror of the secondary evidence is evidence in court.
burdened to satisfactorily prove the predicates thereof.
Notice to the adversary having possession of the original.
A frequently used method of showing that it is impracticable for Note: This is in relation to the articles of the civil code pertaining
the proponent to produce the original writing is to prove, first that to contracts and statute of frauds. ARTICLE 1403 OF THE CIVIL
the original is in the hands of his adversary under his control, and CODE.
second, that the proponent has notified him to produce it at the
In Spouses Paras vs Kimwa the Court held that: reduction to
trial and he has failed to do so.
written form, regardless of the formalitiess observed forbids any
Note: Testimonial evidence before the witness testify while addition to, or contradiction of the temrs of wrutten agreement
documentary evidence is offered after the testimony of a witness. by testimony or other evidence purporting to show that different
terms were agreed upon by the parties varying the purport
After the termination of the testimonial evidence you make now a
written contract
formal documentary evidence. Under the revised rules on civil
procedure right after the termination of the testimonial evidence As a rule evidence of written agreements when the terms of an
the party is now required to make a formal offer of documentary agreement have been reduced to writing, it is considered as
evidence. containing all the terms agreed upon and there can be, as
between the parties and successor in interest, no evidence of
Note: Certified photocopy admissible.
such terms other than the contents of the written agreement.

Parol Evidence Rule

A party may present evidence to modify explain or add to the

This evidence rule seeks to preserve the integrity of written written terms of the agreement if he or she puts in issue in a

agreements by refusing to permit contracting parties to attempt verified pleading the exceptions below.

to alter import of their contract through the use of

Exception to best evidence rule (modify,explain, add)
contemporaneous oral declarations.
1. An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the written
agreement.
 The Parole evidence is exclusively only as between the parties and
2. The failure of the written agreement to express the true intent their successor- in- interest.The parole evidence rule may not be
and agreement of the parties thereto invoked where at least one of the parties to the suit is not a party or
privy of a party to the written document in question and does not base
his claim on the instrument or assert a right originating in the same
3. The validity of the written agreement instrument.

4. The existence of other terms agreed to by the parties or their (SEE PROBLEM NO. 3 and 4PAGES 138 and 139)

successors in interest afterthe execution of the written Note: In case of doubt the intentioon of the parties must prevail for the
agreement. (including wills) intention is the soul of the contract.

Effect if a third party failed to deny the genuiness and due

Two things that must be established for parol evidence to be execution of a document subject of a case.
admitted:
In Santos vs Alcazar it was held that the genuiness and due execution
of the subject document is deemed admitted if the party failed to deny
1. That the existence of any of the 4 exceptions has been put in it. By the admission of the genuiness and due execution of such
document is meant that the party whose signature it bears admits that
issue in party’s pleading or has not been objected to by the he signed it or that it was signed by another under his authority.
adverse parties
Consequence of the admission by the adverse party.
5. That the parol evidence sought to be presented serves to form There is no need for proof of execution and authenticity with respect to
the basis of the conclusion proposed by the presenting party. documents the genuiness and due execution of which are admitted by
the adverse party.

Parol evidence, oral or verbal evidence that which is given by Medical Certificate not a condition sine qua non in rape cases
word of mouth, the ordinary kind of evidence given by witness in
The absence of a medical certificate is not fatal to the cause of the
court. In a particular sense, and with reference to contracts, prosecution. Case law has it that in view of the intrinsic nature of rape,
the only evidence that can be offered to prove the guilt of the offender
deeds, wills, and other writings, parol evidence is the same as is the testimony of the offended party.
extraneous evidence or evidence aliunde.
Section 11. Interpretation of a writing according to its legal
Applicability of Parole Evidence meaning- The language of a writing is to be interpreted according
to the legal meaning it bears in the place of its execution, unless intention of the parties is to be pursued; and when a general and
the parties intended otherwise. a particular provisions are inconsistent, the latter is paramount
to the former. So a particular intent will control a general one that
The provision of Section 11, Rule 130 can be interpreted by article is inconsistent with it.
1370 of the Civil code which is a substantive law. which states that “ if
the terms of a contract are clear and leave no doubt upon the intention If there will be inconsistency between a general and particular
of the contracting parties, the literal meaning of its stipulations shall provision of a contract what will prevail is the particular provision.
control. (PLAIN MEANING RULE)
Note: Definition of Obligation and Contract
It resembles the FOUR Corners rule a princile which allows the courts
in some cases to search beneath the semantic surface for clues to Section 14 Interpretation according to circumstances. For the
meaning. proper construction of an instrument, the circumstances under
which it was made, including the situation of the subject therof
Section 12. Instruments construed so as to give effect to all and of the parties to it, it may be shown, so that the judge may be
provisions. In the construction of an instrument, where there are olaced in the position of those whose language he or she is to
several provisions or particulars, such a construction is, if interpret.
possible to be adopted as will give effect to all.
Note: Section 14 of rule 130 is not applicable to ancillary remedies.
Rule 12, Section 30 states that if there are various stipulation in a (writ of preliminary attachement, TRO, Injunction)
contract all these stipulations shall be interpreted altogether attributing
to the doubtful ones the sense which may result from all of them taken In relation to 1370 and 1371 of the Civil Code.
jointly.
Section 15 Peculiar specification of temrs. The terms of a writing
Doctrine of Noscitur Sociis are presumed to have been used in their primary and general
acceptation, but evidence is admissible to show that they have a
Where a particular word or phrase is ambigous in itself or is equally local, technical or otherwise peculiar signification, and were so
susceptible of various meanings its correct construction may be made used and understood in the particular instance, in which case the
clear and specific by considering the company of the words in which it agreement must be construed.
is found or with which it is assiociated.
(PROBLEM IN PAGE 153)
This doctrine is related to articel 1373 of the civil code which states
that if some stipulation of any contract should admit of several Note: Handwritten stipulations will prevail over a typewritten document
meanings, it shall be understood as being that import which is most because it shows the intent of the parties.
adequate to render it effectual. 1374.
Guiding Principles in the interpretation of written agreement, like
Written vs Typwritten the written will prevail. contracts, under substantive and procedural laws.
Section 13 Interpretation according to intention: general and
particular provisions- in the construction of an instrument, the
Article 1730 If the terms of a contract are clear and leave no doubt of adhesion) because it violates the very definition of a contract
upon the intention of the contracting parties, the literal meaning because the essence of a contract is meeting the mind.
of the stipulations shall control.
Section 19 Construction in favor of natural right. When an instrument is
If the words appear to be contrary to the evident intention of the equally succeptible of two interpretations, one in favor of natural right
parties the latter shall prevail. and the other agianst it, the former is to be adopted.

Article 1371. In order to judge the intention of the contracting Section 20 Interpretation according to usage- An instrument may be
parties, their contemporaneous and subsequent shall be construed according to usage, in order to determine its true character.
principally considered.
Arts 1376 The usage or custom of the place shall be borne in mind in
Section 16 Written words control printed- When an instrument the interpreation of the ambiguities if a contract and shall fill the
consists partly written words and partly of a printed form, and the omission of stipulations which are ordinarily established.
two are inconsistent, the former controls the latter.
Requisites in case of usaeg
Saludo Jr vs Court of Appeals
It must be shown that the said usage has been uniform, long
established generally acquiesced in reasonable, and so well known as
Section 17 Experts and interpreters to be used in explaining to induce the belief that the parties contracted with reference to it.
certain writings
when the characters in which an instrument is written are difficult Qualification of witness
to be deciphered, or the language is not understood by the court,
evidence of persons skilled in deciphering the characters or who Section 21- Witnessses their qualifications- all persons who can
understand the language, is admissible to declare the characters perceive, and percieving, can make known their perception to
or the meaning of the language. others, may be witnesses.

Note: If you need an expert to examine the authenticity or the forgery Religious or political belief, interest in the outcome of the case, or
in a document you must call on NBI document expert and CIDG. conviction of a crime, unless otherwise provided by law, shall not
Section 18 Of two constructions, which preferred - when the be a ground for disqualification.
terms of an agreement have been intended in a different sense by
the different parties to itm that sense is to prevail against either Who can be a witness?
party in which he or she supposed the other understood it, and
when different constructions of a provision are otherwise equally -Provided that a person is capable of expressing his 5 senses may be
proper, that is to be taken which is the most favorable to the party a witness therefore even if a child of tender age may be a witness, a
in whose favor the provision was made. blind may be a witness in a rape case and even a convicted felon.

Article 1377 The interpretation of obscure words or stipulated in a

contract shall not favor the party who cause the obsucrity. (i.e contract
Note: As far as the findings of the trial court is treated with finality. INSTITUTED PRIOR THE PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION NOT
Because the trial court has the chance to observe the demeanor of the AFTER THE FILING OF THE COMPLAINT. (start of the criminal
witness. prosecution:Upon filing of complaint)

In case of doubt in assessing the credibility of a witness may the People vs Sorio- All doubt must be resolved in favor of the accused.
court of appeals conduct trial and examine the witness? People vs Alonte- The pardon to justify the dismissal of the complaint
should have been made prior to the instittution of the complaint
Yes, the court of appeals may conduct trial in order to assess the through filing of the complaint
credibility of a witness. Even sandiganbayan may conduct trial in
assessing a witness. Even in CTA it may conduct the same. Moral Ascendancy in Rape cases

Testimonies of a child victim in rape cases. In cases where the offended party is the father or any member of the
family it is not necessary that actual force or intimidation be employed.
The testimonies of a child victims are normally given full weight and Moral ascendancy takes place of violance or intimidation.
credit, since when a gril, particularly if she is a minor, says that she has
been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape Findings in administrative case
has in fact been committed.
The rule is that findings of an investigating justice in an administrative
When the offended party is of tender age and immature, courts are case on the credibility of a witness are generally given by this court
incided to give credit to her account of what transpired. great weight by reason of their unmatched opportunity to see the
deportment of the witness.
Child as a witness
Sanchez vs Demetrio- Mere invitation is equivalent of arrest.
A child may be competent witness, unless the trial court determines
upon proper showing that the child’s mental maturity is such as to Note: Disqualification by reason of mental incapacity is deleted.
render him incapable of perceiving the facts respecting which he is to
be examined and of relating the facts truthfully.
Credible witness
Once it is etsbalished that the child fully understands the character and
nature of an oath the testimony is given credence. A credible witness must be able to narrate a convincing and logical
story. To be believed it must come not only from the mouth of a
Testimonies of child victims are normally given full weight and credit, credible witness, but must also be credible, reasonable and in accord
since when a girl, particularly if she is a minor, says that she has been with human experience.
raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape has in Testimony in open court vs in the affidavit
fact been committed.
It is settled that affidavits or statements ex parte are generally
Note: If the affidavit of desistance is instituted prior to the filing of considered incomplete and inaccurate. Thus, by nature they are
probable cause then no information may be filed. MUST BE inferior to testimony given in court, and whenever there is
inconsistency between the affidavit and the testimony of a witness in It is also done thru lineups where a witness indentifies the suspect
court, the testimony commands greater weight. from a group of persons lined up for the purpose in resolving the
admissibility of and relying on out of court identification of suspects.
Effect on the probative value of a document presented not by the
person who prepared it. Totality of circumstances test

An unverifeid and unidentified privated document cannot be accorded 1. Witness opportunity to view the criminal at the time of the crime
probative value. It is precluded because the party against whom it is 3. The witness degree of attention at the time
presented is deprived of the right and opportunity to cross examine the 4. The accuracy of any prior description given by the witness
person to whom the statements or writings are attributed. 5. The level of certainty demonstrated by the witness at the
identification
Note: The weight of the testimony of as single witness in a murder 6. The length of time between the crime and identification
case is enough to convict an accussed if the witness is found to be 7. The suggestiveness of the identification
credible.
Note: Denial and alibi are inherently weak defenses and must be
Note: The presumption on the testimony given by a public officer is that
brushed aside when the prosecution has sufficently and positively
in the absence of any controverting evidence, the testimonies of public
ascertained the identity of the accused.
officers are given full faith and credence, as they are presumed to have
acted in the regular performance of their official duties. But this is not
Section 22- Testimony confined to personal knowledge- A witness
enough to override the right of the accused to be presumed innocent
can testify only to those facts which he or she knows of his or her
until proven otherwise.
personal knowledge that is which are derived from his or her own
perception.
Note: In rape cases where the crime usually happened in remote or
isolated places only the victim can testify with regard to the fact of
Note: This is now called the First Hand knowldge rule.
forced coitus. Hence, the lone testimony of the victim is enough to
convict an accused.
Note: The relationship of section 22 of the hearsay rule is that hearsay
rule is proscribes because of lack of the personal knowledge of the
Note: Filing of the complaint for the crime of rape after years or months
person offering testimony.
will not diminish the credibility of the witness depending on the
surrounding circumstances.
If the testimony will not qualify as testimony because it is hearsay
will it still be admissible as evidence?
Rule on out of court identification
Yes, it may still be considered under the principle of res gestae.
Out of court identification is conducted by the police in various ways. It
is done thru show-ups where the suspect alone is brought face to face
Note: The uncertainty exhibited by the witness while giving the
with the witness for identification.
testimony is not a proper ground for exclusion so long as the witness
had an opportunity of personal observation and did get some
impressions from this observation. Under the doctrine of independently relevant statements regardless of
their truth or falsity, th3 rqdt that such statements have been made is
People vs Estiba- Despite the fact that AAA a victim of rape by his relevant.
father BBB choose not to attend in the hearing of the case and BBB
moved for its dismissal on the ground of pardon the court ruled that In People vs Manhuyod Jr. the Court stressed that in appreciating res
this is not a proper ground for dismissal of the case since such kind of gestae the elemt of spontainity is critical. Although it was
pardon must happen before the filing of the complaint. acknowledged that there is no hard and fast rule to establish it.

In People vs Bonaagua the reclassifciation of rape from crime of Res Gestae speaks of a quick continuum of related happenings,
chastity to crime agaisnt person made rape a case that may proceed starting with the occurence of startling event which triggered it and
even with the pardon of the offended party. If the offended party in including any spontaneous declaration made by a witness participant
rape cases refused to testify the court may result to circumstantial or spectator relative to the said occurence.
evidence enough to establish proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Spontaneous exclamation- a statement or exclamation made
Elements of circumstantial evidence immediately after some exciting occation by a participant or spectator
and asserting the circumstances of that occassion as it is observed by
1. There is more than one circumstance him.
8. The facts from which the inference are derived are proven
9. The combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce Hearsay evidence is accorded no probative value for the reason that
conviction beyond reasonable doubt. the original declarant was not placed under oath or affirmation, nor
subjected to cross examination by the defense, except in few instances
People vs Ner elements of res gestae as where the statement is considered part of the res gestae.

1. That the principal act, the res gestae, be startling occurence Excluding hearsay also aims to preserve the right of the opposing party
10. The statements were made before the declarant had the time to to cross examine the original declarant claiming to have a direct
contrive or devise falsehood knowledge of the transaction or occurence.
11. The staments must concern the occurence in question and its
immediate attending circumstance To address the problem in hearsay the court offers to solution

Two test in People vs Salafranca 1. To require that all the witnesses in a judicial trial or hearing be
examined only in the court under oath or affirmation. SEC1 Rule
1. The act declaration or exclamation is so intimately interwoven or 132
connected with the principal fact or event that it characterizes as to 13. To require that all witnesses be subject to the cross exaination
be regarded as part of the transaction itself. by the adverse party. Section 6 Rule 132.
12. The said evidence clearly negatives any premeditation or
purporses to manufacture testimony. Section 23 Disqualification by reason of marriage- During their
marriage, the husband or the wife cannot testify against the other
without the consent of the affected spiuse, except in a civil case Section 24 Disqualification by reason of privileged
by one against the other, or in a criminal case by one agianst the communications- The following persons cannot testify to
other or the latter’s direct descendants or ascendants. matters learned in confidence in the following cases:
Marital Disqualification Rule
a) The husband or the wife, during or after the marriage,
In Alaverez vs Ramirez(act setting fire to the house of his sister in law
cannot be examined without the consent of the other as
where his wife is located) the High Court held that the reason given for to any communication received in confidence by one
marital disqualification rule are: from the other during the marriage except in a civil case
by one against the other, or in a criminal case for a crime
1. There is identity of interests between husband and wife committed by one against the other or the latter’s direct
14. If one were to testify for or against the other, there is descendants or ascendants.
consequent danger of perjury
1. The policy of the law is to guard the security and confidence of b) An attorney or person reasonably believed by the client to
private life, even at the risk of an occassional failure of justice be licensed to engage in practice of law cannot without
and to prevent domestic disunion and unhappiness. the consent of the client be examined as to any
2. Where there is want of domestic tranquility where there is communication made by the client to him or her, or his or
danger of punishing one spouse through the hostile testimony her advice given theron in the course of with a view to
of the other. professional employment nor can an attorney’s secretary,
stenographer or clerk, or other persons assisting the
Exception to the marital disqualification rule. attorney be examined without the consent of the client
and his or her employer concerning any fact the
1. Both in civil actions between the spouse and in criminal cases knowledge of which has been acquired in scuch capacity,
committed by one against the other. (annulment of marriage, except in the following cases.
support, legal seperation)
1. Furtherance of a crime or fraud. If the services or advice
3. Where the marital domestic relations are so strained that there of the lawyer were sought or obtained to enable or aid
is no more harmony anyone to commite what the client new or reasonably
should have known to be a crime or fraud.
4. The security and confidence of private life which the law aims
at protecting, will be nothing but ideals, which through their 2. Claimnants through same deceased client. As to a
absence, merely leave a void in unhappy home. communication relevant to an issue between parties who
claim through the same deceased client, regardless
whether the claims are by testate or intestate or by inter
vivos transaction:
 a) A person licensed to practice medicine engaged in the
3. Breach of duty by lawyer or client. As to a communication diagnosis or treatment of a mental or emotional
relevant to an issue of breach of duty by the lawyer to his condition.
or her client or by the client to his or her lawyer.
c) A person licensed as psychologist by the government
4. Document attested by the lawyer. As to a communication while similarly engaged.
relevant to an issue concerning an attested document to
which the lawyer is an attesting witness or d) A minister, priest, or person reasonably believed to be so,
cannot without the consent of the affected person, be
5. Joint clients. As to a communication relevant to a matter examined as to any communication or confession made to
of common interest between two or more clients if the or any advice given by gim or her, in his or her professional
communication was made by any of them to a lawyer character, in the course of discipline enjoined by the church
retained or consulted in common, when offered in an to which the minister or priest belongs.
action between any of the clients, unless they have
expressly agreed otherwise. e) A public officer cannot be examined during or after his or
her tenure as to communications made to him or her in
c) A physician, psychotherapist or person reasonably official confidence, when the court finds that the public
believed by the patient to be authorized to practice medicine interest would suffer by the disclosure.
or psychotherapy cannot in a civil case, without the consent
of the patient be examined as to any confidential The communication shall remain privileged, even in the
communication made for the purpose of diagnosis or hands of a third person who may have obtained the
treatment of the patient’s physical mental or emotional information, provided that the original parties to the
condition, including alcohol or drug addiction between the communication took reasonable precaution to protect its
patient and his or her physician or psycotherapist. confidentiality.

This privilege applies to persons, including the members of Two types of Spousal privilege
the patient’s family, who have participated in the diagnosis
or treatment of the patient under the direction of the 1. The spousal testimonial privilege- provides that a spouse may
physician or psycotherapist. not be compelled to testify against a defendant- spouse in
criminal prosecution. (anti-marital fact privielege) Unlike the
A “psycotherapist” is: testimonial privilege this only applies in criminal cases.
5. The second privilege involves confidential information between In People vs Judge Castaneda and Manloto the court held that:
spouses and applied in both civil and criminal cases. The
purpose of this rule is to promote marital disclosure. Where the victim of the crim and the person who stands to be directly
(SEE PROBLEM IN PAGE 217 ) prejudices by the falsification is not a third person but the wife herslef
the exception to the marital disqualification rule applies for it is
undeniable that the criminal act complained of had the effect of directly
The marital disqualification rule is distinguished from the marital
and vitally impairing conjugal relation. Thus, where the identity of
communication privilege as follows: 
interest disappears that identity is nonexistent. In such a situtation, the
security and confidence of private life which situation, the law aims at
AS TO PERIOD OF EFFECTIVITY. The marital disqualification rule
protecting will be nothing but ideals which through their absence
is effective only during the existence of the marriage, while the marital
merely leave a void and an unhappy home. Thus, there is no reason
communication rule subsists even after the termination of the
to apply the marital disqualification rule.
marriage. 
Attorney Client Privilege
AS TO SCOPE. The marital disqualification rule is a total prohibition
against any testimony by one spouse for or against the other, while
The attorney-client privilege is intended to permit clients to receive,
the marital communication privilege applies only to confidential
informed legal advice and effective presentation which depends on full
communications between the spouses.
and frank communication between attorneys and their clients.
AS TO A SPOUSE BEING A PARTY TO THE ACTION. The marital
The attorney-client privilege applies only where the communication is
disqualification rule can be invoked only if one of the spouses is a
made for the purpose of receiving legal advice. It extends to
party to the action, while the marital communication privilege may
communication even if the lawyer decides not to represent that person.
be invoked whether or not a spouse is a party to the action. 
It also applies to probono as wel as in house counsel.
Marital disqualification rule vs Marital communication privilege
A representative of the lawyer was defined as one employed to assist
the lawyer in the rendition of professional legal services. (associates
Marital Disqualification is a blanket disqualification of a spouse from
and secretaries).
testifying for or against each other whereas,Marital Communication
Privilege is the privilege applies only to confidential communications.
Exceptions to Attorney- Client Privilege
Marital Disqualification is Effective only during the existence of
1. Cime- Fraud Exception- The privilege does not apply to
marriage whereas, Marital Communication Privilege is effective
communication concerning future criminal or fraudulanet acts. Onle
during and after marriage.
when a client knowingly seeks legal counsel to further a continuing
or future crime does the fraud exception apply. IT REFERS ONLY
Marital Disqualification can be invoked only if one of the spouses is a
TO A CRIME TO BE COMMITTED. BUT IN CASE OF CASES
party to the action whereas, Marital Privilege Communication may
CONSULTED THAT IS PRIVILEGE.
be invoked whether or not a spouse is a party to the action.
15. Claimant through same deceased client- The privilege The physician-patient privileged communication rule essentially means
survives the death of the client and may be asserted by his that a physician who gets information while professionally attending a
representative. When however, the identity of the peson who steps patient cannot in a CIVIL CASE be examined without the patient’s
into the clients shoes is in issue the idenity of the person entitled to consent as to any facts which would blacken the latter’s reputation.
claim privilege remains.
Requisistes for Physician- Patient Privilege
16. Breach of duty by attorney or client- This exception oftenly
applies to a malpractice suit against the attorney or an 1. The privilege is claimed in a civil case
incompetence of counsel claim in post conviction criminal cases. 19. The erson against whom the privilege is claimed is one duly
authorized to practice medicine, surgery, obstetrics
17. Documents attested by a lawyer- The privilege does not 20. Such person acquired the information while he was attending to
apply where the attorney acted as a subscribing witness. (testator)IN the patient in his professional cpacity.
THIS CASE THE LAWYER SERVE MERELY AS WITNESS. 21. The information was necessary to enable him to act in that
capacity
18. Joint Clients- An exception for joint representation is widely 22. The information was confidential and if disclosed would blacken
recognized in situations where two clients subsequently disagree the reputation of the patient.
and litigation ensues. IN CASES WHEN THE LAWYER IS
ENGAGED IN OFF COUNSEL. 4 requisites necessary to confrom to the elements of the
establishment of the privilege
Doctor and Psychoterapist privilege
1. The communications must originate in a confidence that they will not
The privilege is intended to encourage disclosure by patients so as to be disclosed
aid in the effective treatment of disease and injury without fear that 23. This element of confidentiality must be essential to the full and
such information will later become public. The privilege has been satisfactory maintenance of the relation between the parties.
expanded to include dentists in order to protect communications 24. The relation must be one which in the opinion of the community
concerning HIV and AIDS. ought to be fostered
25. The inquiry that must be greater than the benefit thereby
Purpose of privilege gained for the correct disposal of litigation.
To facilitate and make safe full anf confidential disclosure by the Coverage
patient to the physician of all facts, circumstances and symptoms,
untrammeled by apprehension of their subsequent and enforced When the Physician attends to the patient for curative, preventive, or
disclosure and publication on the witness stand, to the end that the palliative treatement. Thus, only disclosures which would have been
physician may form a correct opinion and be enabled to treat the made to the physician to enable him safely and efficaciously to treat
patient. his patient are covered by the privileg.

Note: Psychologist and Psychotherapist are now included

 Two Exceptions to the privilege
Exceptions to the Privilege
1. When the identity of the informant becomes known the privilege
1. Required reports of gunshot, stab or other wounds ceases
26. Required reports of suspected child abuse and neglect 29. If the identity of the informant would provide substantial
27. Required reports of abuse of mentally disabled persons assistance to the defense at trial the state is required to reveal the
28. Test results showing the presence of alcohol or drugs in a indentity of the informant or dismiss the prosecution.
criminal suspect’s body.
Executive Privilege
Patient-litigant waiver rule- this rule prevents a plaintiff from filing a syit
against a physician or hospital thereby putting his medical condition at The source of Executive Privilege is in the case of US vs Nixon.
issue and then refusing to answee questions about this condition
based on privilege.
Neri vs Senate Committe
Clergy-Penitent Privilege
Senate vs Ermita maintaining the confidentiality of conversations of
Clergyman- minister, priest, rabbi or other similar functionary of a the President is necessary in the exercise of her executive and policy
religious organization or an individual reasonably believed to be by the decision making process. Disclosure will have chilling effect and will
person consulting him. hamper her in the effective discharge of her duties and responsibilitues
if she is not protected by such privilege.
Professional relationship- The communication must be made for the
purpose of obtaining spiritual guidance. Kinds of Executive Privilege

Exception 1. The communication privilege pertains to communications,

documents or other materials that reflect presidential decision
Crime-Fraud is an exception because the nature of what may making and deliberations and that the President believes should
reasonably be considered spiritual advice makes it unnecessary to remain confidential. (Decision making of the president)
include in the rule specific exception for communications in furtherance
of crime of fraud. 30. The deliberative process privilege includes advisory
opinions,recommendations and deliberations comprising part of a
Public officers and public interest. process by which governmental decisions and policies are
formulated. (Decision making of executive officials)
This privilege is intended to protect the public interest in effective law
enforcement. The privilege recognizes the obligation of citizens to In Chavez vs PCGG the Supreme court held that there is a
communicate their knowledge of the commission of crimes to law governmental privilege against public disclosure with respect to state
enforcement official and by preserving their anonimity. secrets regarding military, diplomatic and other security matters.
In Chavez vs PEA mattars which has long been considered as ascendants, children or other direct descendants wxcept when
confidential such as information on military and diplomatic secrets, such testimony is indespensable in a crime agisnt that person or
information affecting national security, and information on by one parent against the other.
investigations of crimes by law enforcement agencies before the
prosecution of the accused.
Note: It is evidence alunde meaning it is oral
Elements of Presidential privilege communication (Nixon case)
Cases(7262 and all)
1. The protected communication must relate to a quintessential and
non-delegable presidential power. Applicability of the Privilege

31. The communication must be authored or solicited and recieved Section 25 of Rule 130 is an adaptation from similar provision in article
by a close advisor of the President or the Presid3ent himself. 315 of the civil code applies ony in criminal cases. But the revised
rules on civil procedure choose to extend the prohibition to all kinds of
32. The Presidential communication remains a qualified privilege actions, whether civil, criminal or administrative filed against parents
that may be overcome by showing of adequate need , such that the and other direct ascendants or descendants.
information sought likely contains important evidence and by the
unavailability of the information elsewhere. Note: The privilege cannot apply to the stepmother because the rule
applies only to direct ascendants and descendants. A family tie
When Executive privilege properly invoked connected by a common ancestry.

There must be a formal claom of privilege, ldoged by the head of the Note: Like any other privilege this may be waive by voluntaraly the
department which has control over the matter. person who enjoys such privilege choose to testify.

Note: Absolute privilege communication apply to pleadings submitted Section 26 Privilege relating to trade secrets- A person cannot be
during the preliminary investigation, provided it is relevant. compelled to testify about any trade secret, unless the non-
disclosure will conceal fraud or otherwise work injustice. When
In Belen vs People the court held that a communication is absolutely disclosure is directed, the court shall take such protective
privileged when it is not actionable, even if the author has acted in bad measure as the interest of the owner of the trade secret and of the
faith. Provided that said statements are relevant to the issues and parties and the furtherance of justice may require.
answers are responsive to the questions propounded to said
witnesses. Read: Air Philippine Corporation vs Pennswll

Testimonial Privilege A trade secret is defined as a plan or process, tool, mechanism or

compound known only to its owner and those of his employees to
Section 25. Parental and filial privilege-No person shall be whom it is necessary to confide it.
compelled to testify against his or her parents, other direct
Extent of coverage of trade secrets
1. The extent to which the information is known outside of the SECTION 28. Offer of Compromise Not Admissible. — In civil
employer’s business cases, an offer of compromise is not an admission of any liability,
33. The extent to which the information is known by employees and and is not admissible in evidence against the offeror.
others involved in the business
34. The extent of measures taken by the employer Neither is evidence of conduct nor statements made in
compromise negotiations admissible, except evidence otherwise
Admissions and Confessions discoverable or offered for another purpose, such as proving bias
or prejudice of a witness, negativing a contention of undue delay,
Between confessions and admission the confession is more voluntary. or proving an effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or
In confession the person who’s doing the same is voluntarily doing the prosecution.
same while in admission may be qualified.
In criminal cases, except those involving quasi-offenses (criminal
In cases of confession the one doing so must be accosted by a lawyer negligence) or those allowed by law to be compromised, an offer
and thereafter the lawyer must sign the affidavit saying that he assisted of compromise by the accused may be received in evidence as an
the person confessing. implied admission of guilt.

Admission by counsel is admission by the client. Admission of counsel A plea of guilty later withdrawn or an unaccepted offer of a plea of
happens in guilty to a lesser offense is not admissible in evidence against the
accused who made the plea or offer. Neither is any statement
1. Through the pleadings in pleadings in civil case and in answer. made in the course of plea bargaining with the prosecution, which
35. Pre- trial because in this stage there is stipulation of facts does not result in a plea of guilty or which results in a plea of
guilty later withdrawn, admissible.
What happens if there is an admission with qualification it is not
equivelent to confession since the rules prescribed that there should An offer to pay, or the payment of medical, hospital or other
be an unqualified admission. expenses occasioned by an injury, is not admissible in evidence
as proof of civil or criminal liability for the injury.
(see problem in page 277)
As a general rule an offer of comprimise is not admissible in evidence.
Admission against interest is the best evidence which affords the Since it is not an admission of any liability.
greatest certaintity of the facts in dispute since no man would declare
anything againts himself unless such declaration is true. In criminal cases an offer of compromise is an admission or an implied
admission of guilt. Those involving quasi- offenses or those allowed by
The admitter must be assissted by a counsel in pursuance to US vs law to be compromised an offer of compromise by the accused may be
Arizona. received in evidence as implied admission of guilt.

Section 28 Offer of compromise

In a civil or criminal case, evidence of the following is not In criminal cases, except those involving quasi- offenses or those
admissible against the defendant who made the plea or allowed by law to be compromised an offer of compromise by the
participlated in the plea discussions accused may be received in evidence as implied admission of guilt.

1. a guilty plea that was later withdrawn Except: If the offer of compromise was made, prior to the filing of the
2. A nolo contendere plea criminal complaint against the offeror, the offer of compromise was
3. A statement made during a proceeding on either of those pleas clearly not made in the context of criminal proceeding and therefore,
under Federal rle of criminal procedure cannot be considered as an implied admission of guilt.
4. A statement made during plea discussions with an attorney for the
prosecuting authority if the discussions did not result in a guilty plea SECTION 29. Admission by Third Party. — The rights of a party
or later on withdrawn. cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or omission of
another, except as hereinafter provided.
Exception
Res Inter alios Acta Alteri NOCERE Non DEBET
1. 365 Reckless imprudence or negligence
Case of Salapudin
Nolo contontendere- although the law of numerous states is to the
contrary. The present rule gives effect to the principal traditional Res inter alios acta forbids the introduction of collateral facts which by
characteristics of the nolo plea avoiding the adission of guilt which is their nature are incapable of affording any reasonable presumption of
inherent in pleas. inference as to the principal matter in dispute and thus evidence as to
acts transaction or occurences to which accused is not a party or is not
People vs Espanol Plea or forgivness is analogous to an attempt to connceted is inadmissible.
compromise which in turn can be received as an implied admission of
guilt under section 27. While the confession is arguably relevant, this is not the evidence
competent to establish the probability that Salapuddin participated in
Section 28 Admission by third party the rights of a party cannot be the commission of the crime. Clearly thus, an extra-judicial confession
prejudiced by an act, declaration,or omission of another , except as is binding only on the confessant. It cannot be admitted against his or
hereinafter provided. her co-accused and is considered as hearsay against them.

Note: In proving conspiracy mere knowledge, aacquiscence or

Note: Evidence of furnishing, promising to pay , or offering to pay approval of the act, without the cooperation or approval to cooperate,
,medical, hospital or similar expenses resulting from an injury is not is not sufficient to prove conspiracy. There must be positive and
admissible to prove liability for the injury. conclusive factual evidence indicating the existence of conspiracy.

In civil cases an offer of compromise is not and admission of any SECTION 30. Admission by Co-Partner or Agent. — The act or
liability and is not admissible in eveidnece against the offeror. declaration of a partner or agent authorized by the partyto make a
statement concerning the subject, or within the scope of his or
her authority, and during the existence of the partnership or
agency, may be given in evidence against such party after the
partnership or agency is shown by evidence other than such act Section 31 Admission of a co-conspirator
or declaration. The same rule applies to the act or declaration of a
joint owner, joint debtor, or other person jointly interested with Elements for an admission of a conspirator to be received against his
the party. or her co-conspirator

SECTION 31. Admission by Conspirator. — The act or declaration a. The conspiracy be first proved by evidence other than admission
of a conspirator in furtherance of the conspiracy and during its itself
existence may be given in evidence against the co-conspirator b. The admission relates to the common object
after the conspiracy is shown by evidence other than such act of c. It has been made while declarant was engaged in carrying out the
declaration. (30a) conspiracy.

SECTION 32. Admission by Privies. — Where one derives title to Act or declaration of the whistleblower in the PDAF scam can be
property from another, the latter's act, declaration, or omission, in given probative value during the preliminary investigation without
relation to the property, is evidence against the former if violating the Res Inter Alios Acta rule. This is best seen in the
donewhile the latter was holding the title. (31a) case of Reyes vs Ombudsman.

Exceptions to the res inter alios acta rule Note: The concept of the rules on admission by co-conspirator
constitutes a technical rule on evidence which should not be rigidly
1. Admission by co partner or agent applied in the course of preliminary investigation proceedings.
5. Admission by conspirator
6. Admission by privies
Six types of Privies
XPN to XPN case of Napoles sinc benhur luy was his accountant.
1. Privies of blood such as the heir or his ancestor
Res inter alios acta rule forbids the introduction of collateral facts 7. Privies in representation as executors or administrators to their
which by their nature are capable of affording any reasonable deceased testator o intestate
presumption of inference as to the principal matter in dispute, and thus 8. Privies in the estate as grantor and grantee lessor and lessee
evidence as to acts, transacations or occurences to which accused is assignor and assignee
not a party to or is not connected is inadmissible. 9. Privies in respect to contract
10. Privies in respect of estate and contract as where the lessee
People vs Janet Lim Napoles assigns his interest but the contract between lessor and lessee
continues the lessor not having accepted of assignee
Application of res inter alios acta rule was best elucidated in the case 11. Privies in law as the lord by eacheat a tenant by the curtesy or
of Narra Nickel Mining and Development corp vs Redmont in dower the incumbent of a benefice a husband suing or defending
consolidated mining. A joint venture is an akin to a partnership hence in rights of his wife.
the knowledge of one is the knowledge of all.
Privies- are bound by the judgement are those who acquired an immediately reacted by deial if the statements were orally made
interest in the subject matter after the rendition of judgement. in his presence such prompt response is not expected.
MEANING THE RULE ON ADMISSION BY SILENCE MAY BE
In Republic vs Sandiganbayan the court held that the declarations of RELAXED IF THE STATEMENT WAS MADE IN WRITING.
a person are admissible against a party whenever a privity of estate
exists between the declarant and the party, the term privity of estate
generally denoting succession in rights.
In People vs Espanol the court considered the silence of the
appellant as another piece of evidence his silence when his
wife’s nephew asked him why he killed his wife is deemed as
admission uder section 33.

SECTION 34. Confession. — The declaration of an accused

acknowledging his or her guilt of the offense charged, or of any
SECTION 33. Admission by Silence. — An act or declaration made offense necessarily included therein, may be given in evidence
in the presence and within the hearing or observation of a party against him or her. (33a)
who does or says nothing when the act or declaration is such as
naturally to call for action or comment if not true, and when A confession is the declaration of an accused acknowledging his guilt
proper and possible for him or her to do so, may be given in of the offense charged or any offense necessary included. It is a
evidence against him or her. (32a) declaration made at any time by a person, voluntarily and without
compulsion or inducement stating or acknowledging that he had
committed or participated in the commission of a crime.
Failure of one not under arrest to respond by the denial to
accusation of crime, or element of crime, may be construed as
Admission vs Confession
admission of guilt if such person understood the accusation and
could have responded. A confession is an acknowledgement in express terms, by a party of
his guilt of the crime charged while an admission is a statement by the
Estoppel in pais The doctrine by which a person may be accused , directed, or implied of facts pertinent to an issue tending to
precluded by his act or conduct, or silence when it is his duty to prove his guilt. In other words admission is less than a confession it is
speak, from asserting a right which he otherwise would have an acknowledgement of a fact without necessary proving the guilt of a
had. person.

In the case of Villanueva vs Balaguer the court held that SECTION 35. Similar Acts as Evidence. — Evidence that one did
or did not do a certain thing at one time is not admissible to prove
that he or she did or did not do the same or similar thing at
The rule on admission by silence applies to advers statements in another time; but it may be received to prove a specific intent or
writing if the party was carrying on a mutual correspondence with knowledge, identity, plan, system, scheme, habit, custom or
the declarant. If ther was no such mutual correspondence, the usage, and the like. (34a)
rule is relaxed on the theory that while the party would have
Character evidence- evidence of a person’s character or trait is not 14. An accused may introduce pertinent eveidence of the character
admissible for the purpose of proving that he acted in conformity of the victim as in support of a claim of self defense to a charge f
therewith on a particular occassion. himised or consent in rape.
15. Character of a witness may be disputed in assailing his
Exceptions credibility.

1. A defendant may offer evidence of the defendant’s pertinent trait and Methods of proving character
of the evidence is admitted the prosecutor may offer evidence to
rebutt it. a. By reputation or opinion- when evidence of a person’s character is
12. Subject to cetrain limitations a defendant may offer evidence of admissible it may be proved by testimony about the person’s
an alleged victim’s pertinent traint and if the evidence is admitted the reputation or by testimony in the form of an opinion.
prosecutor ma d. By specific instances of conduct- when a person’s character is an
a. offer evidence to rebut essential element of a charge, claim or defense, the character or
b. offer evidence of the defendant’s same trait trait may also be proved by relevent specific instances or conduct.
c. in a homicide case, the prosecutor may offer evidence of the alleged
victim’s trait of peacefulness to rebut evidence that the victim was the Habit, routine, practice
aggressor first.
Evidence of a person’s habit or an organizaton’s routine practice may
3. Exceptions for a witness when may character evidence of witness be admitted to prove that on a praticular occassion the person or
may be admitted organization acted in acoordance with the habit or routine practice. The
court may admit this evidence regardless of whether it is corroborated
b. Crime, wrongs other acts. or there was an eyewitness.

1. Evidence of a crime, wrong or other act is not admissible to prove a Effect of an admission of the accused charged with acts of
person’s character in order to show that on a particular occassion lasciviousness filed by his eleven year old daughter while he is facing
the person acted in accordance with the character. another rape charged filed by his six year old daughter
13. In certain criminal cases character evidence may be admissible
for another purpose such as proving motive, opportunity, intent, In People vs Losano the court held that it only proves that such a
plan, knowledge, identity. case was filed and pending. It does not prove the propensity of the
accused appellant to crave for his children.
Note: If the character of a person is in issue then statements pertaining
to his character is of no issue. Likewise, character evidence is Note: if the evidence tends to establish the particulaar crime and it is
susceptible of being used for the purpose of suggesting an inference usually competent to prove motive and intent the absence of mistake
that the person acted on the occassion in question consistently with his or accident a common scheme or plan embracing the commission of
character. two or more crimes it is admissible. IN SHORT IF THE EVIDENCE IS
OFFERED TO SHOW THE PLAN OR MODUS OF THE OFFENDER
1. An accused may introduce pertinent evidence of good character in THE EVIDENCE IS ADMISSIBLE.
which the prosecution may rebut.
 Hearsay is a statement other than one made by the declarant himself
or testifying in court.

SECTION 36. Unaccepted Offer. — An offer in writing to pay a A statement is

particular sum of money or to deliver a written instrument or
specific personal property is, if rejected without valid cause, 1. an oral or written assertion
equivalent to the actual production and tender of the money, 36. It is a non verbal conduct of a person
instrument, or property. (35) [SECTION 36.Testimony Generally
Confined to Personal Knowledge; Hearsay Excluded. — Is hearsay admissible during PI?
(Transposed to Sec. 22. Testimony confined to personal
knowledge.)] yes, it is admissible so long as there is substantial basis thereof,
because in finding of probable cause mere suspicion is enough since it
5. Hearsay is a lower quantum of proof as opposed in determining the guilt of a
person.
SECTION 37. Hearsay. — Hearsay is a statement other than one
If it is in trial either criminal or civil if the witness has no personal
made by the declarant while testifying at a trial or hearing, offered
knowledge then it is not admissible.
to prove the truth of the facts asserted therein. A statement is (1)
an oral or written assertion or (2) a non-verbal conduct of a
A statement is not hearsay if the declarant testified in a trial and
person, if it is intended by him or her as an assertion. Hearsay
subjected to cross-examination.
evidence is inadmissible except as otherwise provided in these
Rule.
a) inconsistent with the declarant’s testimony, and was give under oath
subject to the penalty of perjury at a trial, or hearing or other
A statement is not hearsay if the declarant testifies at the trial or
proceeding or deposition
hearing and is subject to cross-examination concerning the
b) Consistent with the declarant’s testimony and is offered to rebut an
statement, and the statement is (a)inconsistent with the
express or imploed charge against the declarant of recent
declarant's testimony, and was given under oath subject to the
fabrication or improper influence or motive
penalty of perjury at a trial hearing, or other proceeding, or in a
c) One of the identification of a person made after perceiving him or
deposition; (b) consistent with the declarant's testimony and is
her.
offered to rebut an express or implied charge against the
declarant of recent fabrication or improper influence or motive; or
(c) one of identification of a person made after perceiving him or
Hearsay a statement that
her. (n)
1. The declarant does not make while testifying at the current trial or
Prior to the amendment of the rule there is no exact definition of
hearing
hearsay. Before the definition of hearsay is that if you don’t have
personal knowledge you don’t have the standing to testify.
37. A party offers in evidence to prove the truth of the matter does not lose its hearsay character simply because the declarant
asserted in the statement. becomes a witness.

First category of exemption -certain prior incosistent statemets, Declarant- is a person who makes a statement. The principal
prior consistent statements and statements of identification are not objection to hearsay is the lack of cross examination.
hearsay.
Note: If the relevance of an out of court statement is the fact that
Second category-covers admissions of a party opponent. the statement was made rather than the truth of the assertion
contained therein, the statement is not hearsay.
5 types of admission
Statement offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter
1. Individual admissions asserted. If the relevance of an out of coourt statement is the fact
2. Adoptive admissions that the statement was made is not hearsay.
3. Authorized admissions
4. Agent admissions Double hearsay- The rule permits the admission of hearsay
5. Co conspirator admissions within hearsay if each part of the hearsay chain falls within an
exception.

Multiple hearsay- hearsay within hearsay if each part of a Impeachment of declarant: Manifest and ask questions if the
double hearsay statments falls within an exception the statement witness cannot answer the question you must manifest to the
is admissible. court to impeach the witness.

Hearsay within hearsay is not excluded by the rule against Multiple hearsay issues often arise in connection with public and
hearsay if each statement of the combined statements conforms business record exceptions.
with an exception to the rule.
In the case of Free Press Inc. vs CA the court explained that
Admissibility- Evidence that falls within one of the exceptions or under the rules, any evidence, whether oral or documentary is
exemptions is not automatically admissible. the statement must hearsay if its probative value is not based on the personal
also satisfy the requirements of other evidentiary rules. knowledge of the witness, but on that of some other person who
is not on the witness stand.
Hearsay- can be defined as an out-of-court statement whose
probative value depends on the credibility of the declarant. A (SEE PROBLEM ON PAGE 366 and 367)
statement other than the one made by the declarant while
testifying at the trial or hearing. Hence, an out of court statement
Note: When parties fail to object to hearsay evidence they are makes use of his or her own languange in writing statements it is
deemed to have waived their right to do so thus it may be generally rejected unless the affiant is placed on the witness
admitted. stand to testify. Hence, once the declarant who made the
affidavit was crossexamined such is already admissible.
Evidentiary value of newspaper articles

In Ocampo vs Enriquez the court held that newspaper articles Probative value of hearsay evidence during Preliminary
amount to hearsay evidence, twice removed and are therefore, Investigation
not only inadmissible but without any probative value at all
whether objected to or not unless offered for a purpose other Note: In determining probable cause it does not depend on the
than proving the truth of the matter asserted. validity of merits of a party’s accusation or defense or on the
admissibility or veracity of testimonies presented correctly
Note: If the purpose of placing the statement on the record is recognizes the doctrin in US that the determination of probable
merely to establish the fact that the statement, or the tenor of cause can rest partailly or even entirely on hearsay evidence as
such statement was made regardless of the truth or falsity of long as the person making the hearsay statement is credible.
such statement th hearsay rule does not apply. Thus, probable cause can be established with hearsay
evidence, as long as there is substantial basis for crediting the
This is called double hearsay since a news paper article has a hearsay.
writer-publisher-and reader.
Certification issued by the Regional Technical Director of
When do you object to hearsay? the DENR cannot be considered Prima Facie Evidence of the
facts stated therein.
As far as testimonial evidence you object before the witness
answered In the case of Republic vs Galeno the court held that if the
witness who identified the Certification was not the one who
As far as documentary evidence you must object at the time of prepared it, it is considered as hearsay. Even if the adverse party
formal offer not when it is being identified. interposed no objection such is still considered as hearsat. Note
that the RD is already under the DENR.

Probative value on affidavit.

Doctrine of Independently Relevant Statement
An affidavit is commonly recognized as hearsay evidence. Since
it is often prepared not by the affiant but by another person who
Under the doctrine of independently relevant statements, 38. That at the time of the declaration was made the declarant is
regardless of their truth or falsity, the fact that such statements concious a of his impeding death
have been made is relevant. The hearsay rule does not apply, 39. The declarant was competent as a witness
and the statements are admissible as evidence. The making of 40. The declarant is offered in a criminal case
the statement is not secondary but primary.
A dying declaration is an evidence of the highest order it is entitled to
In the case of Cambe vs Office of the Ombudsman the Court the utmost credence of the premise that no person who knows of his
impeding death would make a careless false accusation.
held that the testimonies of the whistleblowers are
indenpendently relevant to prove the involvement of Sen. Revilla
SECTION 39. Statement of Decedent or Person of Unsound Mind.
an his co-accused in the present controversy. — In an action against an executor or administrator or other
representative of a deceased person, or against a person of
6. Exceptions to the Hearsay Rule unsound mind, upon a claim or demand against the estate of
such deceased person or against such person of unsound mind,
SECTION 38. Dying Declaration. — The declaration of a dying where a party or assignor of a party or a person in whose behalf a
person, made under the consciousness of an impending death, case is prosecuted testifies on a matter of fact occurring before
may be received in any case wherein his or her death is the the death of the deceased person or before the person became of
subject of inquiry, as evidence of the cause and surrounding unsound mind, any statement of the deceased or the person of
circumstances of such death. (37a) unsound mind, may be received in evidence if the statement was
made upon the personal knowledge of the deceased or the
Note: Even if your statement is hearsay but once you are subjected to person of unsound mind at a time when the matter had been
cross examination your statement is no longer hearsay. Therefore, recently perceived by him or her and while his or her recollection
cross examination is mandatory. was clear. Such statement, however, isinadmissible if made under
circumstances indicating its lack of trustworthiness. (23a)
Note: If there are two cases involving different courts and the witness
died testifying only in rtc who has been crossexamined. what you A person of a sound mind may declare and may be a witness because
need to do is to secure a copy of the TSN and file a motion to adapt one of the qualifications of a witness is his capability to perceive and to
the testimony in the RTC in order for it to be admissible in convey his perception. But, if a witness is not capable to answer then
Sandiganbayan. he must be disqualified as witness.
If the person survived it will be reaffirmed. Dead man’s statute- this is an evidential disqualification which
renders inadmissible oral promises or declarations of a dead person
Elements of Dying Declaration (people vs palanas) when offered in support of their claims by those who bring claims
against the estate of a person.
A person who is about to die will not tell a lie.
Under the said statute if one party to the alleged transaction is
1. The declaration must concern the cause and surrounding precluded from testifying by death, insanity or other mental abilities,
circumstances of the declarant’s death.
the other party is not entitled to the undue advantage of giving his own
uncrontradicted and unexplained account of transaction. Confirmation of an extra-judicial partition considered as
admission against interest.
“Death seals the lips of one party the court seals the lip of the other.”
In Cavile et al vs Litania Hong the court held that confirmation of an
Exception it must be in writing in conncetion to Statute of fraud 1403. extra-judicial partition partakes of the nature of an admission against a
person’s proprietary interest. As such the same may be admitted as
A party declared in default cannot be disqualified as witness evidence against him and his successor-in-interest.

The court held that there is no provision of the Rules disqualifying In consti law if you are under custodial investigation you cannot be
parties in default from taking the witness stand for non-disqualified asked by the police without your own counself of your liking or one
parties. the law does not provide default as an exception. provided by the authorities for you.

Except- Admissions made in fron of tv reportes, social media, whatever

(SEE PROBLEM IN PAGE 382-383) admission made it is admissible except if you are under custodial
investigation.
SECTION 40. Declaration against Interest. — The declaration
made by a person deceased or unable to testify against the Act 190 is the original rules of court
interest of the declarant, if the fact asserted in the declaration was
at the time it was made so far contrary to the declarant's own
interest that a reasonable person in his or her position would not (See problem on page 393)
have made the declaration unless he or she believed it to be true,
may be received in evidence against himself or herself or his or
her successors in interest and against third persons. A statement SECTION 41. Act or Declaration About Pedigree. — The act or
tending to expose the declarant to criminal liability and offered to declaration of a person deceased or unable to testify, in respect
exculpate the accused is not admissible unless corroborating to the pedigree of another person related to him or her by birth,
circumstances clearly indicate the trustworthiness of the adoption, or marriage or, in the absence thereof, with whose
statement. (38a) family he or she was so intimately associated as to be likely to
have accurate information concerning his or her pedigree, may be
Statement against interest- A statement which was at the time of its received in evidence where it occurred before the controversy,
making so far contrary to the declarant’s pecuniary or proprietary and the relationship between the two persons is shown by
interst or so far tended to subject him to civil or criminal liability or to evidence other than such act or declaration. The word "pedigree"
render invalid a claim by him against another or to make him an object includes relationship, family genealogy, birth, marriage, death,
or hatred the reasonble man in his position would not have made the the dates when and the places where these facts occurred, and
statement unless he believed it to be true. the names of the relatives. It embraces also facts of family history
intimately connected with pedigree.
A statement tending to exculpate the accused is not admissible unless
corroborated.
 18. Physical resemblance between the putative father and
One of the exceptions to the hearsay rule encompasses statements child
concerning family history, such as the date and place of birth and
death of members of the family and facts about marriage, descent and A prima facie case exist if a woman declares that she had sexual
relationship. relations with the putative father.

Under the traditional rule- declarations are admissible when made by Affirmative defenses
the person whose family situtation is at issue.
Two types of affirmative defenses
Under the liberal view- declarations by non-family members with a
close relationship to the family are also admitted. These statements 1. The putative father may show incapability of sexual relations with the
were admissible only upon showing that the declarant is unavailable. mother because either physical absence or impotency
19. The putative father may also show that the moder had sexual
Under the strict traditional view- the relationship of the declarant to relations with other men at the time of conception.
the family had to be proved by independent evidence but this
requirement does not apply where declarant’s pwn family relationship Presumption of Legitimacy
were the subject of the hearsay statement.
A child born to a husband and wife during a valid marriage is
The rules follow the liberal view in allowing statements by intimate presumed legitimate. The child’s legitimacy may be impugned only
associates of the family. under the strict standards provided by law.

Requisites in order that pedigree may be proved Probative value of Physical Resemblance

1. The actor or declarant is dead or unable to testify Physical resemblance between the putative father and child may
41. The act or declaration is made by a person related to the be offered as part of evidence of paternity
subject by birth or marriage
42. The relationship between the declarant or the actor and subject Physical resemblance between the putative father and child may be
is shown by evidence other than such act or declaration offered as part of evidence of paternity. Resemblance is a trial
43. The act or declaration was made ante litem motam or prior to technique unique to a paternity proceeding. This kind of evidence
the controversy. appleas to the eotions of the trier of fact.

Procedural aspects of a traditional paternity action Incriminating acts acceptable as evidence to establish filiation

1. A prima facie case Conventional evidence as rge relavent incriminating verbal and written
16. Affirmative defenses acts by the putative father under article 278 of the civil code shall be
17. Presumption of legitimacy made in a record of birth, a will, a statement before a court of record or
in any authentic writing to be effective, the claim or filiation must be
made by the putative father himself.
 the results of the DNA analysis should be considered as corroborative
Result of the DNA can be admitted as evidence to prove paternity evidence. If the value is 99.9% or higher then there is refutable
presumption of paternity. Below 99.9 it is inadmissible.
In the case of Herrera vs Alba the high court held that DNA analysis
as evidence can be admitted to prove filiation. Right against self incrimination applicable only to testimonial
evidence.
DNA Analysis as Evidence
In the case of Herrera vs Alba petitioner asserts that obtaining
In People vs Vallejo the DNA profile form the vaginal swabs taken from samples from him for DAN testing violates his rigt against self
the rape victim matched the accused’s DNA profile. The Supreme incirmination. The court held that obtaining DNA samples from an
Court affirmed the accused’s conviction of rape with homicide and accused in a criminal case or from the respondent in a paternity case,
setenced him to death. will not violate the right against self-incrimination. This privilege only
appluies to communicative evidence.
Things to be considered in assessing DNA

1. How the samples were collected

44. How they were handled
45. The possibility of contamination of samples
46. Whether the proper procedures and standards were followed in (39a)SECTION 42. Family Reputation or Tradition Regarding
conducting the tests and qualification of the anayst who conducted Pedigree. — The reputation or tradition existing in a family
tests. previous to the controversy, in respect to the pedigree of any one
of its members, may be received in evidence if the witness
Daubert standard testifying thereon be also a member of the family, either by
consanguinity, affinity, or adoption. Entries in family bibles or
1. Whether the theory or tecnique can be or has been tested other family books or charts, engraving on rings, family portraits
47. Whether the theory or technique has been subjected to peer and the like, may be received as evidence of pedigree. (40a)
review and publication
Records of family history kept in family bibles have by long
48. The known or potential rate of error
tradition been received in evidence recognizig family Bible entries
49. The existence and maintenance of standards controlling the
as proof of age in the absence of public records along with
technique’s operation
tombstones.
50. Whether the theory or technique is generally accepted in the
scientific community Matters of family history or traditionally have also been probable
by reputation in the family and community the exception requires
Minimum value of the probability of paternity reputation among family members of the community to establish
such facts and not simply assertions by individuals.
DNA analysis that excludes putative father from paternity should be
conclusive proof of non-paternity. If the value of W is less than 99.9% In Jos vs CA the high court ruled that
1. The portio which pertains to testimonial evidence, under which One method of authenticating a writing is to show that it is a least
documents in question may not be admitted as the authors thereof tweant years old, is unsuspicious in appearance and came from a
did not take the witness stand. place of custody for such writing.

51. To qualify as entries in family bibles or other family books or

charts engravings or rights and family portaits. SECTION 44. Part of the Res Gestae. — Statements made by a
person while a startling occurrence is taking place or immediately
Note: Private documents not constituting family possessions as prior or subsequent thereto, under the stress of excitement
discussed above may not be admitted. The authority appears to be in caused by the occurrence with respect to the circumstances
favor of the theory that it is the general repute, the common reputation thereof, may be given in evidence as part of theres gestae. So,
in the family, and not the common reputation in community that is a also, statements accompanying an equivocal act material to the
material element of evidence to establish pedigree. issue, and giving it a legal significance, may be received as part
of the res gestae. (42a)
SECTION 43. Common Reputation. — Common reputation
existing previous to the controversy, as to boundaries of or 1. Present Sense Impression- A statement describing or explaining an
customs affecting lands in the community and reputation as to event or condition, made while or immediately after the declarant
events of general history important to the community, or perceived it.
respecting marriage or moral character, may be given in
evidence. Monuments and inscriptions in public places may be 52. Excited utterance- A stateent relating to a startling event or
received as evidence of common reputation. (41a) condition made while the declarant was under the stress of
excitement that it caused.
The first protion of exception is based upon the general admissibility
of evidence reputation as to land boundaries and land customs Under excited utterances the standard of measurement is the duration
expanded in this courty to include private as well as public boundaries. of the state of excitement.Obviously there are no particular asnwer and
The reputation is required to antedate the controversy, though the character of the transaction or event will largely determine the
not to be ancient. significance of the time factor.

When the location of boundaries is at issue reputation is admitted to In the case of Palanas vs Palanas the court held that Res Gestae
prove that location. Traditionally the reputation not only had to refers to the circumstances, facts and declarations that grow out of the
antedate thebeginning of the present controversy but also it had to be main fact and serve to illustrate its character and are so spontaneous
ancient. and contemporaneous with the main fact as to exclude the ideal of
deliberation and fabrication.
Reputation is also admissible to prove a variety of facts which can be
ebst described as matters of general history. Requisites of Res Gestae

Ancient Document Rule 1. The principal act, the res gestae is a statrling occurrence
53. The statements were made before the declarant had time to 56. The record was kept in a regularly conducted activity of a
contrive or devise business, organization, occupation, or calling whether or not for
54. The statement must concern the occurence in question and its profit.
immediately attending circumstances. 57. Making the record was a regular practice of that activity
58. All these conditions are shown by the testimony of the
Dying declaration can also be treated to form part of res gestae custoduan or another qualified witness or by a certification that
complies with a statute permitting certification.
In People vs Palanas the Dying declaration of SPO2 Borre was treated 59. The opponent does not show that the source of information or
to be part of res gestae. His statement that he was shot by Palanas method or circumstances of preparation indicate lack of
and his companion. His utterance was made in spontaneity and only trusworthiness.
on reactio to the startling occurence.
The rule requires that
Test of Admissibility
1. Record of an act, event, condition, opinion or diagnosis
1. Whether the act, declaration or exclamation is so intimately 60. Made it at near time
interwoven or connected with the principal fact or event that it 61. By information transmitted by a person with knowledge
characterizes as to be regarded as a part of the transaction itself. 62. Which was kept in the course of a regularly conducted business
55. Whether it clearly negates any premeditation or purpose to activity
manufacture testimony. 63. If it was the regular practice to make such record
64. As shown by the testimony of custodian
SECTION 45. Records of Regularly Conducted Business Activity.
65. Unless the source of information or method or circumstances of
— A memorandum, report, record or data compilation of acts,
preparation indicate a lack of trusworthiness.
events, conditions, opinions, or diagnoses, made by writing,
typing, electronic, optical or other similar means at or near the
Time requirement the record must have been made at or near at the
time of or from transmission or supply of information by a person
time of the event. It is satisfied if the data was recorded near the time
with knowledge thereof, and kept in the regular course or conduct
of the event the time at which a computer printout is produced does not
of a business activity, and such was the regular practice to make
matter.
the memorandum, report, record, or data compilation by
electronic, optical or similar means, all of which are shown by the
Business duty requirement- If the supplier of the information is not
testimony of the custodian or other qualified witnesses, is
under a business duty to transmit that information, the record is
excepted from the rule on hearsay evidence. (43a)
typically inadmissible.
Records of Regularly conducte activity
Note: The foundation requirements for business records may be shown
by the testimony of the custodian or other qualified witness as provided
1. The record was made at or near the time by- or from information
by the rules. The foundational witness must be sufficiently acquinted
transmitted by someone with knowledge.
with the records management system to establish that the
requirements have been satisfied.
How entries made in the course of the business qualify as an SECTION 47. Commercial Lists and the Like. — Evidence of
exception to the hearsay rule. statements of matters of interest to persons engaged in an
occupation contained in a list, register, periodical, or other
1. The person who made those entries is dead, outside the country, or published compilation is admissible as tending to prove the truth
unable to testify of any relevant matter so stated if that compilation is published
66. The entries were made at or near the time of the transaction to for use by persons engaged in that occupation and is generally
which they refer used and relied upon by them therein. (45)
67. The entrant was in a position to know the facts stated therein
68. The entries were made in the professional capacity or in the
course of duty of the entrant
69. The entries were made in the ordinary or regulary course or
duty. SECTION 48. Learned Treatises. — A published treatise,
periodical or pamphlet on a subject of history, law, science, or art
In Canque vs CA the court held that when the witness had no is admissible as tending to prove the truth of a matter stated
personal knowledge of the facts entered by him, and the person who therein if the court takes judicial notice, or a witness expert in the
gave him te information is individually known and may testify as to the subject testifies, that the writer of the statement in the treatise,
facts stated in the entry which not part of a system of entries such periodical or pamphlet isecognized in his or her profession or
entry is not admissible without the testimony of the informer. calling as expert in the subject. (46a)

SECTION 49. Testimony or Deposition at a Former Proceeding. —

SECTION 46. Entries in Official Records. — Entries in official The testimony or deposition of a witness deceased or out of the
records made in the performance of his or her duty by a public Philippines or who cannot, with due diligence, be found therein,
officer of the Philippines, or by a person in the performance of a or is unavailable or otherwise unable to testify, given in a former
duty specially enjoined by law, are prima facie evidence of the case or proceeding, judicial or administrative, involving the same
facts therein stated. (44a) parties and subject matter, may be given in evidence against the
adverse party who had the opportunity to cross-examine him or
In People vs Laba a case for violation of RA 9165 the SC held that her. (47a)
Under section 46 entries in official records made in the performance of
official duty are prima facie evidence of the facts they state. Thus, the
testimony of the chemical analys, and the report of an official forensic SECTION 50.Residual Exception. — A statement not specifically
chemist regarding a recovered prohibited durg enjoys the presumption covered by any of the foregoing exceptions, having equivalent
of regularity in its preparation. circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness, is admissible if the
court determines that (a) the statement is offered as evidence of a
material fact; (b) the statement is more probative on the point for
which it is offered than any other evidence which the proponent
can procure through reasonable efforts; and (c) the general
purposes of these rules and the interests of justice will be best
served by admission of the statement into evidence. However, a SECTION 54. Character Evidence Not Generally Admissible;
statement may not be admitted under this exception unless the Exceptions. — Evidence of a person's character or a trait of
proponent makes known to the adverse party, sufficiently in character is not admissible for the purpose of provin
advance of the hearing, or by the pre-trial stage in the case of a ction in conformity therewith on a particular occasion, except:
trial of the main case, to provide the adverse party with a fair (a) In Criminal Cases:
opportunity to prepare to meet it, the proponent's intention to
offer the statement and the particulars of it, including the name (1)The character of the offended party may be proved if it tends to
and address of the declarant. (n) establish in any reasonable degree the probability or
improbability of the offense charged.

7. Opinion Rule (2) The accused may prove his or her good moral character,
pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense charged.
SECTION 51. General Rule. — The opinion of a witness is not However, the prosecution may not prove his or her bad moral
admissible, except as indicated in the following sections. (48) character unless on rebuttal.

SECTION 52. Opinion of Expert Witness. — The opinion of a (b) In Civil Cases:
witness on a matter requiring special knowledge, skill,
experience, training or education, which he or she is shown to Evidence of the moral character of a party in a civil case is
possess, may be received in evidence. (49a) admissible only when pertinent to the issue of character involved
in the case.

(c) In Criminal and Civil Cases:

SECTION 53. Opinion of Ordinary Witnesses. — The opinion of a
witness, for which proper basis is given, may be received in
Evidence of the good character of a witness is not admissible
evidence regarding —
until such character has been impeached.
(a) The identity of a person about whom he or she has adequate
In all cases in which evidence of character or a trait of character
knowledge;
of a person is admissible, proof may be made by testimony as to
(b) A handwriting with which he or she has sufficient familiarity;
reputation or by testimony in the form of an opinion. On cross-
and
examination, inquiry is allowable into relevant specific instances
(c) The mental sanity of a person with whom he or she is
of conduct.
sufficiently acquainted.
In cases in which character or a trait of character of a person is
an essential element of a charge, claim or defense, proof may
The witness may also testify on his or her impressions of the
also be made of specific instances of that person's conduct.
emotion, behavior, condition or appearance of a person. (50a)

8. Character Evidence