Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 3

Evidence

Not an end itself. It is a means. Means authorized by the rules.


The Rules of Evidence applies primarily on judicial proceedings.
The ROE cannot be insisted upon in an administrative agency. It can only be used if
the quasi-judicial adopted the ROE by analogy.
See Sec 4, Rule 1.
Case:
1. Coca Cola Bottlers (labor case)
Certain workers were dismissed. They went to LA. LA said they are illegally
dismissed. NLRC affirmed. CCB appealed to CA under Rule 65. They contend
that the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion because they admitted
evidence like affidavits not subject to cross examination thus such evidence
are hearsay. SC held that the contention of CCB is untenable. ROE is not a
judicial proceedings and ROE cannot be strictly applied to quasi-judicial
proceedings like the NLRC in this case.

2. Ong chia (Naturalization case)


Can the CA in the naturalization case, consider a document which was not
presented a court below and was not formally offered? The court decided that
while it is true that the evidence was not formally offered, the present case is
a naturalization case and the ROE of evidence does not apply. Unless the CA
adopted the ROE by analogy.
PURPOSE of EVIDENCE
To know the truth of the fact.
Truth- not actual truth
Y? a judge has no power to look the inner most part of our brains.
The word truth means the truth offered as evidence. (Legal truth)
Case: People v Aminudin
A tip a guy named Aminudin would disembark marijuana in Iloilo.
The police officer immediately arrested him while going down the gang plank
and while holding a bayong. The SC acquitted Aminudin because the arrest is
baseless. Aminudin was not doing any direct obvert act of a crime. Thus he was not
doing any crime in their presence. Theres no in flagrante delicto.

Case: People v Mingote


A man tipped the police that there was a suspicious man walking on their
street. The police then immediately went to arrest the suspicious man and then
searched him and found a gun. The SC acquitted Mingote because when asked why
the police officer arrested Mingote, he told the court that the latter is suspicious.
Thus, the accused was not committing a crime in his presence. The gun found is
said to be a fruit of the poisonous tree because it was obtained illegally.

AMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE
To be admissible to requisites must concur
1. Competent authority in evidence. Matter of rule
a. Sec 3 Rule 128- axiom- principle.
2. Relevant- relationship between the evidence and the issue if the case. If
the matter is related to the issue, then the evidence is relevant.

NOTE: the inadmissibility of evidence is waivable.


NOTE: the evidence may be admissible but not credible.
NOTE: A person who committed a crime in the past doesnt mean that it could be
presented as evidence to prove propensity of the person to commit the crime. It can
only be used to show the accuseds modus operandi of the present crime is as the
same as the past crime.
Sec 1, Rule 130
The prosecution cannot prove the moral character of the accused unless in
rebuttal.
(The prosecution cannot put the character of the accused in issue.)
Collateral Matters- no direct connection to the issue. However if it shown
that it has connection then it will admissible.
NOTE: expn to hearsay rule (pedigree)
Admissibility of evidence has nothing to do with credibility of the evidence.
JUDICIAL NOTICE
See codal provision
NOTE: you cannot compel the RTC to take judicial notice of municipal ordinances
within their jurisdiction unless the law tells it to do so.

Example: Manila has in its charter that they should take judicial notice of city
ordinance of Manila.
NOTE: For courts above MTC judicial notice is not automatic.

JUDICIAL ADMISSION (need not be proven)


-

Is an admission of a party.
Need not be in writing (can be oral)
The admission must be in the same case

GR: you cannot contradicted a judicial admission


XPN:
1. Made through palpable mistake
2. Theres no such admission made
NOTE: admission in an open court with respect to the other case is not a judicial
admission. It must be offered in evidence. But if the admission is done in an open
court with respect to the same case, then it is judicial admission.