EVIDENCE PRIMER

BASIC CONCEPTS
Evidence - It is the means, sanctioned by the Rules of Court, of ascertaining in
a judicial proceeding the truth respecting a matter of fact.
2 Kinds of Facts:
1. Ultimate fact (factum probandum)- principal, determinate and constitutive
facts upon the existence of which the plaintiffs cause of action rests.

does not refer to the details of probative matter or particulars of evidence

by which these material elements are to be established

proposition to be established, necessarily hypothetical

2. Evidentiary facts (factum probans) facts which are necessary for the
determination of the ultimate facts

Premises upon which conclusions of ultimate facts are based.

Brought forward as a reality to convince the tribunal that the factum

probandum is also real
Factum probandum
"ultimate facts"
Proposition to be established
Hypothetical

Factum probans
"intermediate facts"
Material
evidencing
proposition
Existent

the

Corroborative evidence - It is additional evidence of a different kind and

character tending to prove the same point.
Cumulative evidence - It is additional evidence of the same kind and character
tending to prove the same proposition.
Irrelevant evidence - offered piece of evidence has no probative value
Inadmissible evidence - offered evidence is excluded by some rule of evidence
Incompetent evidence - offered evidence is not qualified under the rules of
testimonial evidence
Immaterial evidence the offered evidential fact is directed to prove some
probandum which is not proper in issue. The rule of substantive law and of
pleading are what determines immateriality
Conditional Admissibility evidence is admissible only in dependence upon
other facts. It is received on the express assurance of counsel, when objection
is manifested, that other facts will be duly presented at a suitable opportunity
before the case is closed.

Multiple Admissibility - When a fact is offered for one purpose, and is admissible
in so far as it satisfies all rules applicable to it when offered for that purpose, its
failure to satisfy some other rule which would be applicable to it offered for
another purpose does not exclude it.
Curative Admissibility - A party has the right to introduce incompetent evidence
in his behalf where the court has admitted the same kind of evidence adduced
by the adverse party. This is to prevent manifest injustice.
Collateral Matters matters other than the facts in issue and which are offered
as a basis merely for inference as to the existence or non-existence of the facts
in issue.
2 axioms of admissibility
1. Only those facts which have rational probative value are admissibile
2. All facts having rational probative value are admissibile unless prohibited by
some specific rule.
INSTANCES WHEN PROOF CAN BE DISPENSED WITH
Instances when proofs can be dispensed with:
1. Res ipsa loquitur
2. Presumptions
3. Judicial notice
4. Judicial admissions
Kinds of presumptions:
1. Conclusive - which the law does not allow to be controverted
2. Disputable - which are satisfactory if uncontradicted, but which may be
contradicted and overcome by other evidence
Judicial Notice cognizance of certain facts by the court w/o proof because they
are facts, which, by common experience, are of universal knowledge among
intelligent persons w/in a country or community
Requisites of Judicial notice
1. matter of common knowledge
2. well & authoritatively settled and not doubted or uncertain
3. known to be w/in the limits of jurisdiction of the court
Matters that are judicially noticed (mandatory)
1. existence & territorial extent of states
2. forms of govt and symbols of nationality
3. law of nations
4. admiralty & maritime courts of the world & their seals
5. political constitution & history of the Philippines

6. laws of nature
7. measure of time
8. geographical divisions and political history of the world
9. facts which are of public knowledge
10. facts which are capable of unquestionable demonstration
11. facts which ought to be known to judges because of their judicial
functions
Discretionary Judicial Notice
1. matters of pubic knowledge
2. capable of unquestionable demonstration
3. ought to be known to judges because of their judicial functions
Judicial Admission admission, verbal or written, made by a party in the
course of the proceedings in the same case; does not require proof.
Atillo v CA
FACTS : Petitioner filed a collection case against L Petitioner claims that L made
a judicial admission of his personal liability in the answer.
HELD : Petitioner took the admissions out of context. The general rule is that
judicial admissions are conclusive upon the party making it and does not
require proof. Exception to the rule is when there is palpable mistake or when
no such admission was in fact made. Such means that the statement is not in
the sense in which the admission is made to appear.
RULES OF ADMISSIBILITY
Object Evidence
Object (Real) Evidence that which is addressed directly to the sense of the
court without the intervention of a witness, as by actual sight, hearing, taste,
smell or touch. A.K.A autoptic proference.
Documentary Evidence
Documentary Evidence documents as evidence consist of writings or any
material containing letters, words, numbers, figures, symbols or other modes of
written expressions offered as proof of their contents
Original of a document
1. the contents of which are the subject of the inquiry
2. when a document is in two or more copies executed at or about the same
time with identical contents
3. when an entry is repeated in the regular course of the business
Exceptions to the rule that only original documents may be admissible:
1. when the original has been lost or destroyed

2. when the original is in the custody or control of the party against whom it is
offered, and the latter fails to produce it
3. when the original is a public record in the custody of a public officer or is
recorded in a public office
4. when the original consists of numerous accounts or cannot be examined by
the court without great loss of time
Best Evidence Rule

only original of the document is admissible.

Merely assures presentation of the original document and bars non-original

documents, etc.. BUT not evidence aliunde or parol evidence

Refers only to the factum probandum but not to the interpretation of the
document.

Original must be presented first before evidence aliunde may be presented

Secondary Evidence- that which shows that better or primary evidence

exists as to the proof of the fact in question.

It is that class of evidence which is relevant to the fact in issue, it being

first shown that the primary evidence of the fact is not obtainable

When Secondary Evidence is Admissible

1. original has been lost or destroyed
2. prove the existence or execution of the original
3. prove the cause of the unavailability of the original, is not due to the bad
faith of the offeror.
3 Kinds of Secondary Evidence that may be presented:
1. copy of the writing
2. recital of its contents in some authentic document
3. recollection of witnesses in the order stated

Authentic document merely means that the document should be genuine.

It need not be a public document

Parol Evidence Rule

Forbids any addition to or contradiction of the terms of a written instrument

by testimony purporting to show that, at or before the signing, of the
document, other or different terms were orally agreed upon by the parties
Exceptions to the Parol Evidence Rule
(must be alleged in the pleadings) [F-I-V-E]
1. Failure of the written agreement to express the true intent & agreement of
the parties
2. Intrinsic ambiguity
3. Validity of the written agreement
4. Existence of other terms agreed to by the parties

To justify the reformation of a written instrument upon the ground of mistake,

the concurrence of three things is necessary:
1. mistake should be one of fact
2. mistake should be mutual or common to both parties to the instrument
3. mistake should be alleged and proved by clear and convincing evidence
2 kinds of ambiguities
1. patent (extrinsic) where the instrument on its face is unintelligible
2. latent (intrinsic) where the words of the instrument are clear but their
application to the circumstances is doubtful

the rule permits parol evidence to explain an intrinsic ambiguity

Rules governing admissibility of parol evidence to explain ambiguity

1. where the instrument itself seems clear and certain on its face, and the
ambiguity arises from some extrinsic or collateral matter, the ambiguity may
be helped by parol evidence (latent ambiguity)
2. where the ambiguity consists in the use of equivocal words designing the
person or subject-matter, parol evidence of collateral or extrinsic matter
may be introduced for the purpose of aiding the court in arriving at the
meaning of the language used (intermediate ambiguity)
3. where the ambiguity is such that a perusal of the instrument shows plainly
that something more must be added before the reader can determine what
of several things is meant, the rule is inflexible that parol evidence cannot
be admitted to supply the deficiency (patent ambiguity)
Difference between best evidence rule and parol evidence rule
Documents
What
excluded

Best Evidence
All kinds
is Secondary
copies

Parol Evidence
Agreements, contracts, wills
evidence; Any oral, written evidence to
prove
contents;
prior/
contempora-neous with the
contract

What
is Only originals
included
Exceptions
Lost or destroyed;
in the possession of the
adverse party; or
in the possession of a
public officer
Procedure
Existence
Execution
Loss
Contents
*objection
should
be

Ambiguity;
Does not express the true
intent of the parties;
Validity is in question;
Subsequent changes
Exception must be put in issue
in the complaint or answer ( as
an affirmative defense)

Purpose

Issue

made ASAP
To compel litigants to To preserve agreements
present
only
the
originals.
Draft the contract carefully
For the parties to always Go into the interpretation of
keep the originals
the contents of the contract
Contents of the writing
No issue as to the contents of
the writing
Secondary evidence is The purpose of the offer of
offered to prove the parol evidence is to change,
contents of a writing vary,
modify,
qualify
or
which is not allowed contradict the terms of a
unless the case falls complete written agreement
under
any
of
the which is not allowed unless the
exceptions
case falls under any of the
exceptions

Classes of Documents
(1) Public, consisting of:
(a) The written official acts, or records of the official acts of the sovereign
authority, official bodies and tribunals, and public officers, whether of the
Philippines, or of a foreign country;
Note: These documents are evidenced by either:
(1) official publication thereof; or
(2) a copy attested by the officer having the legal custody of the record,
or by his deputy. The attestation must state, in substance, that the
copy is a correct copy of the original copy, or a specific part thereof,
and must be under the official seal of the attesting officer or his court.
If the record is not kept in the Philippines, in addition to the foregoing
requirements, there must be a certificate that such officer has the
custody.
(b) Documents acknowledged before a notary public, except last wills and
testaments; and
Note: Notarial documents may be presented in evidence without further
proof. The certificate of acknowledgement is prima facie evidence of the
execution of the instrument or document involved.

(c) Public records, kept in the Philippines, of private documents required by

law to be entered therein.
Note: These documents may be proved by:
(a) the original record, or
(b) a copy thereof attested by the legal custodian of the record, with an
appropriate certificate that such officer has the custody.
(2) Private, consisting of all other writings.
Note: Before any private document offered as authentic is received in
evidence, its due execution and authenticity must be proved either by:
(1) Anyone who saw the document executed or written; or
(2) Evidence of the genuineness of the signature or handwriting of the
maker.
Any other private document need only be identified as that which it is
claimed to be.
A judicial record may be impeached by evidence of:
(1) Want of jurisdiction in the court or judicial officer;
(2) Collusion between the parties; or
(3) Fraud in the party offering the record, in respect to the proceedings
Documents that do not need to be authenticated:
(1) Public documents;
(2) Notarial documents;
(3) Ancient documents
Ancient Document Rule - Where a private document is:
(1) more than 30 years old,
(2) is produced from a custody in which it would naturally be found if genuine,
and
(3) is unblemished by any alterations or circumstances of suspicion
no other evidence of its authenticity need be given. (Rule 132, Sec. 21)

In what Instances must alterations in documents be accounted for by the

producing party?
(1) The document being produced as genuine has been altered;
(2) The alteration appears to have been done after the execution of the
document;
(3) The alteration appears to have been in a part material to the question in
dispute.
What explanations are satisfactory so as to make the altered document
admissible in evidence?
The producing party must show that the alteration was:
(1) made by another;
(2) made without his (the producing partys) concurrence;
(3) made with the consent of the parties affected by it;
(4) otherwise properly or innocently made; or
(5) such that it did not change the meaning or language of the instrument.
Interpretation of Documents

Construction is the process or the art of determining the sense, real

meaning, or proper explanation of obscure or ambiguous terms or provisions
in a statute, written instrument or oral agreement, or the application of such
subject to the case in question

Interpretation is the art or process of discovering and expounding the

meaning of a statute, will, contract or other written document
Rules in the interpretation of documents
(1)legal meaning the writing bears in the place of its execution;
(2)all provisions must be given effect;
(3)intention of the parties must be pursued;
(4)a particular intent will control a general intent inconsistent with it;
(5)circumstances of execution may be shown;
(6)terms are presumed to have been used in their primary and general
acceptation; but evidence is admissible to show an otherwise peculiar
signification;
(7)written words control printed;
(8)experts & interpreters can be used to explain characters difficult to be
deciphered or language not understood by the court;
(9)when terms were intended in different senses, that sense is to prevail
against either party in which he supposed the other understood it;
(10) when different constructions are otherwise equally proper, the one most
favorable to the party in whose favor the provision was made will be taken;
(11) construction in favor of natural right;
(12) instrument may be construed according to usage
Testimonial Evidence

GENERAL RULE: The following are not grounds for disqualification:

(1) Religious belief;
(2) Political belief;
(3) Interest in the outcome of the case; and
(4) Conviction of a crime
Exception: When provided for by law.
Grounds for disqualification enumerated in the Rules on Evidence:
Disqualification by reason of:
(1) Mental incapacity
(2) Immaturity
(3) Marriage
(4) Death or insanity of adverse party
(5) Privileged communication
Distinguish between the marital disqualification rule and the privileged marital
communication rule.
Marital Disqualification
Extent
prohibition
Should
spouse
party?

of Total.
All
testimony, Only
confidential
whether adverse or not, communication.
regardless of source.

either YES.
be
a

Marriage
subsisting
time
testimony?

Privileged Marital
Disqualification

Not necessarily.

YES.

Not necessarily.

The affected spouse

The other spouse

at
of

Who can invoke

Operability of the Ceases upon death of Continues even after

rule
either
spouse,
or the termination of the
termination
of
the marriage.
marriage.
Privileged Communications
1. Marital Confidential communication

Requisites:
a. spouses are legally married
b. privilege is claims with regard to a communication, oral or written, made
during the marriage
c. said communication was made confidentially
d. action or proceeding where the privilege is claimed is not by one against the
other
3. Attorney-Client Privileged Communication
Requisites:
a. legal advice of any kind is sought
b. from a professional legal adviser in his capacity as such
c. the communications relating to that purpose
d. made in confidence
e. by the client
f. are at his instance permanently protected
g. from disclosure by himself or by the legal adviser
h. except that the protection may be waived
4. Physicians and clients
Requisites:
a. civil case
b. person against whom the privilege is claimed is one duly authorized to
practice medicine, surgery or obstetrics
c. such information was acquired while he was attending to the patient in his
professional capacity
d. the information was necessary to enable him to act in that capacity, and if
disclosed, shall blacken the reputation of the patient
5. Priest and penitent
Requisites:
a. clergyman or priest and a penitent
b. confession of a penitential character
c. made to the priest in his professional character
d. confession is sanctioned by the church to which the priest or religious officer
belongs
6. Public officers
Requisites:
a. confidential communication
b. made to or obtained by a public officer
c. obtained in the exercise of his public function
d. disclosure of the communication would be detrimental to the public interest
Parental and Filial privilege - No person may be compelled to testify against his
parents, other direct ascendants, children, or other direct descendants.
Notes:
This provision does not apply to spouses.

This provision means that you may testify if you want, but you may not be
compelled to testify.
This provision is subject to the qualification in Sec. 215 of the Family Code,
i.e. a descendant may be compelled to testify against parents and
grandparents IF the testimony is indispensable in a crime against the
descendant or by one parent against the other.

Admissions and Confessions

Admission - It is an act, declaration or omission as to a relevant fact. It may be
given by a party (in which case Rule 130, Sec. 26 will be applicable) or by a
third-party.
Gen. Rule: Confessions of a defendant made to witnesses are admissible
against him, but are inadmissible against his co-defendant
Exception:
a. confessions on the stand
b. confessions not objected to
c. adopted confession
d. identical confession
e. corroborated confession
f. confession by conspirator (after conspiracy has been shown & proven)
Self-serving declaration - a declaration wherein:
(1) the testimony is favorable to the declarant;
(2) it is made extrajudicially; and
(3) it is made in anticipation of litigation.
Self-serving declarations are not admissible.
Requisites for the admissibility of an admission:
(1) must involve matters of fact and not of
law;
(2) must be categorical and definite;
(3) must be knowingly and voluntarily
made;
(4) must be adverse to the admitters
interest
Confession - It is the declaration of an accused acknowledging his guilt of the
offense charged, or of any offense necessarily included therein.
Differentiate an admission from a confession.
Admission
Definition

Confession

Statement of fact which Declaration

does
not
involve
an acknowledging ones

acknowledge-ment of guilt guilt of the offense

or liability
charged
Form

May be express or tacit

Must be express

Made by

Party or 3rd person

Party himself

Cases in which Both criminal

applicable
cases

and

civil Usually criminal cases

Differentiate an admission and confession in criminal cases.

Definition

Sufficiency
authorize
conviction

Admission

Confession

Statement by the accused,

direct or implied, of facts
pertinent to the issue and
tending, in connection with
proof of other facts, to
prove his guilt

Acknowledgment
in
express terms by a
party in a criminal
case of his guilt of the
crime charged

to Insufficient. Tends only to Sufficient

a establish the ultimate fact
of guilt.

Differentiate the effects of judicial and extrajudicial confessions.

A judicial confession is sufficient in itself to sustain a conviction, even in capital
offenses. On the other hand, an extrajudicial confession is insufficient in itself
to sustain a conviction. It must be corroborated by evidence of the corpus
delicti
Requisites for the admissibility of extrajudicial confessions?
(1) Must involve an express and categorical acknowledgment of guilt (US v.
Corales);
(2) The facts admitted must be constitutive of a criminal offense (US v. Flores);
(3) Must have been given voluntarily (People v. Nishishima);
(4) Must have been made intelligently (Bilaan v. Cusi)
(5) Must have been made with the assistance of competent and independent
counsel (Art III, Sec. 12, 1987 Constitution)
Rules governing extrajudicial confessions:

General Rule: :The extrajudicial confession of an accused is binding only upon

himself and is not admissible against his co-accused.
Exceptions:
(1) Interlocking confessions, i.e. extrajudicial confessions independently made
without collusion which are identical with each other in their material
respects and confirmatory of the other (People v. Encipido);
(2) If the co-accused impliedly acquiesced in or adopted said confession by not
questioning its truthfulness (People v. Orenciada);
(3) Where the accused admitted the facts stated by the confessant after being
apprised of such confession (People v. Narciso);
(4) If the accused are charged as co-conspirators of the crime which was
confessed by one of the accused and said confession is used only as
corroborative evidence (People v. Linde);
(5) Where the confession is used as circumstantial evidence to show the
probability of participation by the co-conspirator (People v. Condemena);
(6) Where the confessant testified for his co-defendant (People v. Villanueva);
(7) Where the co-conspirators extrajudicial confession is corroborated by other
evidence of record (People v. Paz)
Rules on offer of compromise
Civil cases: Not admission of liability; not
admissible in evidence against offeror
Criminal cases: Admissible against
accused as implied admission of guilt
Exceptions:
(1) Quasi-offenses (criminal negligence)
(2) Those offenses allowed by law to be compromised (e.g., Sec. 204,
NIRC of 1977)
The following are not admissions of liability or guilt and are therefore not
admissible in evidence:
(1) Plea of guilty later withdrawn;
(2) Unaccepted offer of plea of guilty to a lesser offense;
(3) Offer to pay or payment of medical, hospital or other expenses
occasioned by an injury

res inter alios acta rule - the rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act,
declaration or omission of another (i.e. a non-party), except in the following
instances:
1. by partner, agent or other person jointly interested with the party
Requisites:
a. the partnership, agency or joint interest is proven by evidence other than
the act or declaration sought to be admitted
b. the admission is within the scope of the partnership, agency or joint interest
c. admission was made while the agency, pship or joint interest was in
existence
2. by conspirator
Requisites:
a. conspiracy is first proved by evidence other than the admission itself
b. admission relates to the common object
c. that it has been made while the declarant was engaged in carrying out the
conspiracy
3. by privies
Requisites:
1. Relation of privity between party and declarant;
2. Admission was made by the declarant as predecessor-in-interest, while
holding title to the property;
3. The admission was in relation to said property.
Requisites for admission by silence:
(1) Hearing and understanding of the statement by the party;
(2) Opportunity and necessity of denying the statements;
(3) Statement must refer to a matter affecting his right;
(4) Facts were within the knowledge of the party;
(5) Facts admitted or the inference to be drawn from his silence would be
material to the issue (Regalado)
Distinguish :
Self-serving declaration
Declaration against interest
Not admissible since introduction Admissible notwithstanding
would open door to frauds and hearsay character
perjuries
Admission
Not necessarily against the interest
of person who made the admission
May be used although person
making the admission is still alive
May be used only against the
admitter & those identified with

its

Declaration against interest

Always a declaration against selfinterest
Refers to declaration made by a
deceased person
Admissible against 3rd persons

him in legal interest

Hearsay Evidence rule - A witness can testify only to those facts which he
knows of his personal knowledge.
Independently relevant statement - It is a statement whose probative value is
independent of its truth or falsity. The mere fact of its utterance is relevant,
2 kinds of independently relevant statements:
(1) Statements which are the very facts in issue;
(2) Statements which are circumstantial evidence of the facts in issue
(Francisco)
Reasons for Excluding Hearsay
1. irresponsibility of the original declarant
2. depreciation of truth in the process of repetition
3. opportunities for fraud would open
4. tendency of such evidence to protect legal inquiries, and encourage the
substitution of weaker for stronger proofs.
Exceptions to Hearsay Rule
1. Dying declaration
Requisites:
a. death is imminent
b. declarant is conscious of his impending death
c. declaration refers to material facts which concern the identity of the
deceased or the accused, the cause & circumstances of the killing
d. declarant would be competent to testify had he survived
e. any case wherein the subject is his death
2. Declaration against interest
Requisites:
a. declarant would not be available to testify (dead, mentally incapacitated
incompetent etc..)
b. declaration must concern a fact cognizable by declarant
c. circumstances must render it improbable that a motive to falsify existed
3. Act or declaration against pedigree
Requisites:
a. declarant is dead or unable to testify
b. pedigree must be in issue
c. declarant must be a relative of the person whose pedigree is in question
d. declaration must be made before the controversy occurred ante-litem
motam
4. family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree
Requisites:
a. tradition or reputation is one existing in the family
b. reputation or tradition was formed ante-litem motam

c. witness testifying to the reputation or tradition is a member of the family

5. Common reputation
Requisites:
a. that the matter to which the reputation refers to is of public or general
interest and more than 30 years old
b. that the reputation is one formed in the community interested
c. it existed ante litem motam
6. Part of the res gestae
a. spontaneous exclamations
Requisites:
1) the principal fact, the res gestae, must be a startling occurrence
2) statements must have been made before the declarant had time to contrive
or devise
3) statements must concern the occurrence in question and its immediately
attending circumstances
b. Contemporaneous statements or verbal acts
Requisites:
1) conduct characterized by the words must be independently material to the
issue
2) conduct must be equivocal
3) words must aid in giving legal significance to the conduct
4) words must accompany the conduct
Spontaneous exclamations

Contemporaneous or verbal
act
startling Res gestae is the equivocal act

Res
gestae
is
the
occurrence
Exclamation may be prior to, Verbal
act
must
be
simultaneous with or subsequent contemporaneous with or must
to the startling occurrence
accompany the equivocal act
7. entries in the course of business
Requisites:
a. entrant made the entries in his professional capacity or in the performance
of a duty
b. entrant is dead, outside of the Phils. or unable to testify
c. entries were made in the ordinary course of business or duty
d. entries were made at or near the time of the transaction to which it relates
e. entrant was in a position to know the facts stated in the entry
f. there must be more than one entry
8. Entries in official records
Requisites:
a. entry was made by a public officer or by another person specially enjoined
by law to do so

b. made in the performance of his duties or by another person in the

performance of a duty specially enjoined by law
c. the public officer or the other person had sufficient knowledge of the facts
by him stated, acquired by him either personally or thru official channels
connected with the exercise of his public functions
9. Commercial lists and the like
10. Learned treatises
11. Testimony or deposition at a former proceeding
Requisites:
a. testimony was rendered in a former case
b. identity of parties
c. identity of subject matter
d. adverse party had opportunity to cross-examine the witness
e. witness is dead, outside of the Phils., pr unable to testify in the subsequent
trial
The Opinion Rule
The opinion of a witness is not admissible, except in the following cases:
(1) On a matter requiring special knowledge, skill, experience or training which
he possesses, that is, when he is an expert thereon;
(2) Regarding the identity or the handwriting of a person, when he has
knowledge of the person or handwriting, whether he is an ordinary or
expert witness;
(3) On the mental sanity of a person, if the witness is sufficiently acquainted
with the former or if the latter is an expert witness;
(4) On the emotion, behavior, condition or appearance of a person which he
has observed; and
(5) On ordinary matters known to all men of common perception, such as the
value of ordinary household articles (Galian v. State Assurance Co., Ltd.)
Rules on Character Evidence
GENERAL RULE: Not admissible.
Exceptions:
(a) In criminal cases:

(1) Accused may prove his good moral character which is pertinent to the
moral trait involved in the offense charged.
(2) Prosecution may only prove accuseds bad moral character pertinent to
the moral trait involved in the offense charged during rebuttal.
(3) The good or bad moral character of the offended party may be proved
if it tends to establish in any reasonable degree the probability or
improbability of the offense charged.
(b) In civil cases
Evidence of the moral character of a party is admissible only when
pertinent to the issue of character involved in the case.
(c) Evidence of a witness good moral
character is admissible only once such character has been impeached.
Burden of Proof and Presumptions

matters which need not be proved by a party to an action are:

1. allegations contained in the complaint or answer immaterial to the issues
2. facts which are admitted or which are not denied in the answer, provided
they have been sufficiently alleged
3. those which are the subject of an agreed statement of facts between
parties, as well as those admitted by the party in the course of the
proceedings in the same case
4. those subject to judicial notice
5. facts which are legally presumed
6. facts peculiarly w/in the knowledge of the opposite party
What are the rules on impeachment of witnesses?
GENERAL RULE: The party producing a witness is not allowed to impeach his
credibility.
Exceptions:
(1) Unwilling or hostile witness;
A witness may be considered as unwilling or hostile only if so declared
by the court upon adequate showing of:
(a) his adverse interest,
(b) unjustified reluctance to testify; or

(c) his having misled the party into calling him to the witness
stand. (Rule 132, Sec. 12)
(2) Witness who is an adverse party;
(3) Officer, director, or managing agent of a public or private corporation
or of a partnership or association which is an adverse party.
In these instances, such witnesses may be impeached by the party
presenting him in all respects as if he had been called by the adverse party,
except by evidence of his bad character.

How may an adverse partys witness be impeached?

(1) By contradictory evidence;
(2) By evidence that his general reputation for truth, honesty, or integrity is
bad;
(3) By evidence that he has made at other times statements inconsistent with
his present testimony (a.k.a. prior inconsistent statements)
Laying the predicate (a) Confronting the witness with the prior inconsistent statements with the
circumstances under which they were made;
(b) Asking him whether he made such statements; and
(c) Giving him a chance to explain the inconsistency. (Rule 132, Sec. 13)
A witness may not be impeached by evidence of particular wrongful acts.
Except that it may be shown by the
examination of the witness, or the record of the judgment, that he has
been convicted of an offense.
Leading question - It is a question which suggests to the witness the answer
which the examining party desires. It is not allowed, except:
1. On cross-examination;
2. On preliminary matters;
3. When there is difficulty is getting direct and intelligible answers from a
witness who is ignorant, or a child of tender years, or is of feeble-mind, or a
deaf-mute
4. Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or

5. Of a witness who is an adverse party or an officer, director, or managing

agent of a public or private corporation or of a partnership or association which
is an adverse party
Misleading question - A misleading question is one which assumes as true a
fact not yet testified to by the witness, or contrary to that which he has
previously stated. It is not allowed.
What are the rights of a witness?
(1) To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or insulting questions, and from
harsh or insulting demeanor;
(2) Not to be detained longer than the interests of justice require;
(3) Not to be examined except only as to matters pertinent to the issue;
(4) Not to give an answer which will tend to subject him to a penalty for an
offense unless otherwise provided by law; or
(5) Not to give an answer which will tend to degrade his reputation, unless it be
to the very fact at issue or to a fact from which the fact in issue would be
presumed. But a witness must answer to the fact of his previous final
conviction for an offense.
Exceptions to the rule against repetition of objections
1. where the question has not been answered, it is necessary to repeat the
objection when the evidence is again offered or the question again asked
2. evidence of the same kind as that previously admitted over objection
3. incompetency is shown later
4. objection refers to preliminary question it must be repeated when the same
question is again asked during the introduction of actual evidence
5. objection to evidence was sustained but reoffered at a later stage of the trial
6. evidence is admitted on condition that its competency or relevance be
shown by further evidence and the condition is not fulfilled, the objection
formerly interposed must be repeated or a motion to strike out the evidence
must be made
7. where the court reserves the ruling on objection, the objecting party must
request a ruling or repeat the objection
Distinction between presumption of
Presumption of Innocence
Conclusion drawn by law in favor of
citizens

innocence and reasonable doubt

Reasonable Doubt
Condition of mind produced by
proof resulting from evidence in
the case
Evidence introduced by law to be Result of insufficient proof
considered by the court
OFFER AND OBJECTION

Offer of evidence. - The court shall consider no evidence which has not been
formally offered. The purpose for which the evidence is offered must be
specified.
When to make offer:
Testimony of a witness - at the time the witness is called to testify.
Documentary and object evidence - after the presentation of a party's
testimonial evidence. Such offer shall be done orally unless allowed by the
court to be done in writing.
Objections:
- Objection to evidence offered orally must be made immediately after the offer
is made.
- Objection to a question propounded in the course of the oral examination of a
witness shall be made as soon as the grounds therefor shall become reasonably
apparent.
- An offer of evidence in writing shall be objected to within three (3) days after
notice of the offer unless a different period is allowed by the court.
- The grounds for the objections must be specified.
When repetition of objection unnecessary. - When it becomes reasonably
apparent in the course of the examination that the questions asked are of the
same class as those to which objection has been made (whether sustained or
overruled), it shall not be necessary to repeat the objection, it being sufficient
for the adverse party to record his continuing objection to such class of
questions.
Ruling:
The ruling of the court must be given immediately after the objection is made,
unless the court desires to take a reasonable time to inform itself on the
question presented; but the ruling shall always be made during the trial and at
such time as will give the party against whom it is made an opportunity to
meet the situation presented by the ruling.
The reason for sustaining or overruling an objection need not be stated. If the
objection is based on two or more grounds, a ruling sustaining the objection on
one or some of them must specify the ground or grounds relied upon.
Striking out answer. - Should a witness answer the question before the adverse
party had the opportunity to voice fully its objection to the same, and such
objection is found to be meritorious, the court shall sustain the objection and
order the answer given to be stricken off the record.
On motion, the court may also order the striking out of answers which are
incompetent, irrelevant, or otherwise improper.
Tender of excluded evidence:

- If documents or things offered are excluded by the court, the offeror may
have the same attached to or made part of the record.
- If the evidence excluded is oral, the offeror may state for the record the name
and other personal circumstances of the witness and the substance of the
proposed testimony.
Weight and Sufficiency of Evidence
Preponderance of evidence - In determining where the preponderance or
superior weight of evidence on the issues involved lies, the court may consider
all the facts and circumstances of the case, the witnesses' manner of testifying,
their intelligence, their means and opportunity of knowing the facts to which
they are testifying, the nature of the facts to which they testify, the probability
or improbability of their testimony, their interest or want of interest, and also
their personal credibility so far as the same may legitimately appear upon the
trial. The court may also consider the number of witnesses, though the
preponderance is not necessarily with the greater number.
Proof beyond reasonable doubt - does not mean such a degree of proof as,
excluding possibility of error, produces absolute certainty. Moral certainty only
is required, or that degree of proof which produces conviction in an
unprejudiced mind.
An extrajudicial confession made by an accused, shall not be sufficient ground
for conviction - unless corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti.
Circumstantial evidence is sufficient for conviction if:
(a)
There is more than one circumstance;
(b)
The facts from which the inferences are derived are proven; and
(c)
The combination of all the circumstances' is such as to produce a
conviction beyond reasonable doubt.
Substantial evidence - that amount of relevant evidence which a reasonable
mind might accept as adequate to justify a conclusion.
Power of the court to stop further evidence. - The court may stop the
introduction of further testimony upon any particular point when the evidence
upon it is already so full that more witnesses to the same point cannot be
reasonably expected to be additionally persuasive. But this power should be
exercised with caution.
Evidence on motion. - When a motion is based on facts not appearing of record
the court may hear the matter on affidavits or depositions presented by the
respective parties, but the court may direct that the matter be heard wholly or
partly on oral testimony or depositions.