EVIDENCE

ASSIGNMENT NUMBER 6

Assignment 6

EVIDENCE
Instruction: Answer the following questions.

1. Define Evidence.

Section 1 of Rule 128 of the Rules of Court defines evidence as the means, sanctioned by the Rules, of
ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the truth respecting a matter of fact.

2. What are the two elements that must concur for evidence to be admissible?

As provided in Section of Rule 128, the following elements must concur:

a) The evidence is relevant; and

b) The evidence is not excluded by the rules.

3. When may collateral matters be admitted in evidence?

Under Section 4 of Rule 128, a collateral matter may be admitted if it tends in any reasonable degree to establish
the probability or improbability of the fact in issue.

4. Enumerate matters which are subject to mandatory judicial notice under Sec. 1, Rule 129.

A court shall take judicial notice, without the introduction of evidence, of the following:

1. the existence and territorial extent of states;

2. their political history;

3. forms of government and symbols of nationality;

4. the law of nations;

5. the admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their seals;

6.the political constitution and history of the Philippines;

7. the official acts of legislative, executive and judicial departments of the Philippines;

8. the laws of nature;

9. the measure of time; and

10. the geographical divisions.

5. Enumerate matters which are subject to discretionary judicial notice under Sec. 2, Rule 129.

A court may take judicial notice of the following matters:

1. Matters that are of public knowledge;

2. or are capable to unquestionable demonstration;

3. or ought to be known to judges because of their judicial functions.

1 | | ABELLERA,DE C A S T R O , F A J A R D O , G R A N D E , L A C H I C A , M A L I N A O , Q U I J A N O , S A N D I C O
A N D Y M A L A Y N O T E S
6. When a disputed fact is subject to judicial notice, is there a need for the parties to present evidence to
prove such fact?

NO. As a general rule, there is a need to present because the purpose of evidence is to ascertain the truth
respecting a matter of fact in a judicial proceeding. Evidence is required because of the presumption that the court is not
aware of the veracity of the facts involved in a case. It is therefore, incumbent upon the parties to prove a fact in issue
through the presentation of admissible evidence.

However, when the rule on judicial notice is invoked, the court may dispense with the presentation of evidence
on judicially-cognizable facts. The taking of judicial notice is a matter of expediency and convenience for it fulfils the
purpose that the evidence is intended to achieve, and in this sense, it is equivalent to proof. (LBP V. Yatco Agricultural
Enterprises)

7. State the doctrine of processual presumption.

Foreign laws must be alleged and proved. In the absence of proof, the foreign law will be presumed to be the
same as the laws of the jurisdiction hearing the case.

8. Distinguish “factum probandum” from “factum probans”.

Factum probandum and factum probans are distinguished in this wise:

Factum probandum is the fact or proposition to be established while factum probans are the facts or material
evidencing the fact or proposition to be established.

Stated in another way, the factum probandum is the fact to be proved; it is the fact which is in issue and to
which the evidence is directed.

On the other hand, factum probans is the probative or evidentiary fact tending to prove the fact in issue.

9. a) When may judicial admissions be considered as such?; b) How may judicial admissions be
contradicted by evidence?

a) Under Sec. 4, Rule 129 of the Rules of Court, these are admissions, verbal or written, made by a party in the
course of the proceedings in the same case, which does not require proof.

Additional notes:
It is subject to cross examination. Admissible even if self-serving. Conclusive upon admitter.

Requisites:

a. It must be made by a party to the case of his counsel;

b. It must be made in the course of the proceedings in the same case; and
c. It can be verbal or written admission. There is no particular form required.

b) Grounds for contradicting judicial admissions:

1. Upon showing that the admission was made through palpable mistake; or
2. When it is shown that no such admission was made.

Remedy of party who made judicial admissions:

1. Written admission
2. Oral admission

10. a) Define object evidence; b) When is object evidence admissible?

2 | | ABELLERA,DE C A S T R O , F A J A R D O , G R A N D E , L A C H I C A , M A L I N A O , Q U I J A N O , S A N D I C O
A N D Y M A L A Y N O T E S
 a.) Object as evidence are those addressed to the senses of the court. When an object is relevant to the fact in
issue, it may be exhibited to, examined or reviewed by the court. It is not limited to the view of an object. It covers the
entire range of human senses: hearing, taste, smell and touch.

b.) In order to be admissible, the following requisites must exist:

A. It must be relevant and competent;

B. Authenticated;
C. The authentication must be made by a competent witness who should identify the object to be the actual thing
involved; and
D. The object must be formally offered in evidence.

11. When does a document considered a documentary evidence?; b) Can a document or writing be
considered an object evidence? Explain.

a) Documents as evidence consists of writing s or any material containing letter, words, numbers, figures, symbols, or
other modes of written expressions, offered as proof of their contents. Sec. 2 Rule 130

A document is considered as documentary evidence when the following instances exist:

a. When the document is relevant;

b. When documents should be authenticated and proved in the manner provided in the Rules of Court. Such
authentication must be done by a competent witness;
c. The documents should be identified and marked; and
d. They should be formally offered to the court and shown to the opposing party so that the latter may have the
opportunity to object thereto.

b) Can a document or writing be considered an object evidence?

Documents are object evidence if the purpose is to prove their existence or condition, or the nature of
the handwriting thereon, or to determine the age of the paper used, or the blemishes or alterations thereon, as where
falsification is alleged.

12. a) State the Best Evidence Rule and its exceptions.

General Rule:

It provides that when the subject of the inquiry is the contents of the document, no evidence shall be admissible
other than the original document itself.

Exceptions:

A. When the original has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, without bad faith on the part of
the offeror;
B. When the original is in the custody or under the control of the party against whom the evidence is offered, and
the latter fails to produce it after reasonable notice;
C. When the original consists of numerous accounts or other documents which cannot be examined in court without
great loss of time and the fact sought to be established from them is only the general result of the whole;
D. When the original is a public record in the custody of a public officer or is recorded in a public office.

Note:

The best evidence rule, applied to a documentary evidence, operates as a rule of exclusion, that is, secondary
evidence cannot be inceptively be introduced as the original writing itself must be produced in court, except in the
exceptions provided.

13. What documents are considered original?

There are three concepts to be considered as an original document, to wit:

1. The original of a document is one the contents of which are the subject of inquiry;

3 | | ABELLERA,DE C A S T R O , F A J A R D O , G R A N D E , L A C H I C A , M A L I N A O , Q U I J A N O , S A N D I C O
A N D Y M A L A Y N O T E S
2. When a document is in 2 or more copies executed at or about the same time, with identical contents, including signed
carbon copies, all such copies are equally regarded as originals; or
3. When an entry is repeated in the regular course of business, one being copied from another at or near the time of the
transaction, including entries in journals and
ledgers, all the entries are likewise equally regarded as originals (Sec. 4).

14. What evidence is/are admissible – a) when the original of a document was lost or destroyed?; b) when
the original of the document is a public record.

A.) When the original document has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, the offeror, upon proof
of its execution or existence and the cause of its unavailability without bad faith on his part, may prove its contents by a
copy, or by a recital of its contents in some authentic document, or by the testimony of witnesses in the order stated.
(Sec. 5. Rule 130)

B.) When the original of document is in the custody of public officer or is recorded in a public office, its contents
may be proved by a certified copy issued by the public officer in custody thereof. (Sec. 7, Rule 130)

Written official acts, or records of the official acts of the sovereign authority, official bodies and tribunals, and public
officers, e.g. a written foreign law, may be evidenced by:

1. If it is within the Philippines

a. an official publication thereof; or
b. by a copy attested by the officer having the legal custody of the record, or by his deputy.

2. If it is kept in a foreign country

a. an official publication thereof; or
b. by a copy attested by the officer having the legal custody of the record, or by his deputy and accompanied with a
certificate that such officer has the custody.

The certificate may be made by a secretary of the embassy or legation, consul general, consul, vice consul, or consular
agent or by any officer in the foreign service of the Philippines stationed in the foreign country in which the record is
kept, and authenticated by the seal of his office (Sec. 24, Rule 132).

15. State the Parole Evidence Rule and its exceptions.

It is any evidence aliunde (extrinsic evidence) which is intended or tends to vary or contradict a complete and
enforceable agreement embodied in a document (Regalado, Vol. II, p. 730, 2008 ed.). It may refer to testimonial, real or
documentary evidence. The purpose of which is to give stability to written statements; to remove the temptation and
possibility of perjury; and to prevent possible fraud. Exception is when a party may present evidence to modify, explain or
add to the terms of the written agreement if he puts in issue in his pleadings the following:

1. An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the written agreement;

2. Failure of the written agreement to express the true intent of the parties thereto;
3. Validity of the written agreement; or
4. Existence of other terms agreed to by the parties or their successors in interest after
the execution of the written agreement. (Sec. 9)

16. Enumerate the rules in the interpretation of a document.

The following are the rules in the interpretation of a document:

1. The language of a writing is to be interpreted according to the legal meaning it bears in the place of its execution,
unless the parties intended otherwise.
2. Where there are several provisions or particulars, such a construction is, if possible, to be adopted as will give effect to
all.
3. The intention of the parties is to be pursued; and when a general and a particular provision are inconsistent, the latter
is paramount to the former. So a particular intent will control a general one that is inconsistent with it.
4. The circumstances under which it was made , including the situation of the subject thereof and of the parties to it, may
be shown, so that the judge may be placed in the position of those whose language he is to interpret.
5. The terms of a writing are presumed to have been used in their primary and general acceptation, but evidence is
admissible to show that they have a local, technical, or otherwise peculiar signification, and were so used and understood
in the particular instance, in which case the agreement must be construed accordingly.

4 | | ABELLERA,DE C A S T R O , F A J A R D O , G R A N D E , L A C H I C A , M A L I N A O , Q U I J A N O , S A N D I C O
A N D Y M A L A Y N O T E S
6. When an instrument consists partly of written words and partly of a printed form, and the two are inconsistent, the
former controls the latter.
7. When the characters in which an instrument is written are difficult to be deciphered, or the language is not understood
by the court, the evidence of persons skilled in deciphering the characters, or who understand the language, is admissible
to declare the characters or the meaning of the language.
8. When the terms of an agreement have been intended in a different sense by the different parties to it, that sense is to
prevail against either party in which he supposed the other understood it, and when different constructions of a provision
are otherwise equally proper, that is to be taken which is the most favorable to the party in whose favor the provision
was made.
9. When an instrument is equally susceptible of two interpretations, one in favor of natural right and the other against it,
the former is to be adopted.
10. An instrument may be construed according to usage, in order to determine its true character (Secs. 10-19).

17. Who may be qualified as a witness?

Who may be qualified as a witness?

All persons who:

1. can perceive and perceiving;
2. can make known their perception to others (Sec. 20, Rule 130);
3. must take either an oath or an affirmation (Sec. 1, Rule 132; Riano, Evidence: A Restatement for the Bar, p. 245, 2009
ed.); and
4. must not possess the disqualifications imposed by law or the rules (Riano, Evidence: A Restatement for the Bar, p. 246,
2009 ed.)

NOTE: The ability to make known the perception of the witness to the court involves two factors: (a) the ability
to remember what has been perceived; and (b) the ability to communicate the remembered perception. Consider a
witness who has taken the oath and who has personal knowledge of the event which he is going to testify (Riano,
Evidence: A Restatement for the Bar, p. 248, 2009 ed).

18. Who are disqualified as a witness by reason of mental incapacity?

The following persons are disqualified to e a witness due to mental incapacity:

1) Those whose mental condition, at the time of their production for examination, is such that they are incapable of
intelligently making known their perception to others;

2) Children whose mental maturity is such as to render them incapable of perceiving the facts respecting which they are
examined and of relating them truthfully (Sec. 21).

19. a) What is marital disqualification?; b) What is marital privilege?

a) Marital disqualification means that, during their marriage, neither the husband nor the wife may testify for or
against the other without the consent of the affected spouse, except in a civil case by one against the other, or in a
criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latter's direct descendants or ascendants (Sec. 22).

b)
Marital privilege means that, the husband or the wife, during or after the marriage, cannot be examined without
the consent of the other as to any communication received in confidence by one from the other during the marriage
except in a civil case by one against the other, or in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the
latter's direct descendants or ascendants (Sec. 24).

The application of the rule requires the presence of the following elements:
(a) There must be a valid marriage between the husband and the wife;
(b) There is a communication made in confidence by one to the other; and
(c) The confidential communication must have been made during the marriage.

20. Who may be disqualified to witness by reason of privilege communication?

5 | | ABELLERA,DE C A S T R O , F A J A R D O , G R A N D E , L A C H I C A , M A L I N A O , Q U I J A N O , S A N D I C O
A N D Y M A L A Y N O T E S
 1) The husband or the wife, during or after the marriage, cannot be examined without the consent of the
other as to any communication received in confidence by one from the other during the marriage except in a civil case by
one against the other, or in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latter's direct
descendants or ascendants (Sec. 24).

2) An attorney cannot, without the consent of his client, be examined as to any communication made by the
client to him, or his advice given thereon in the course of, or with a view to, professional employment, nor can an
attorney's secretary, stenographer, or clerk be examined, without the consent of the client and his employer,
concerning any fact the knowledge of which has been acquired in such capacity (Sec. 24).

3) A person authorized to practice medicine, surgery or obstetrics cannot in a civil case, without the
consent of the patient, be examined as to any advice or treatment given by him or any information which he may have
acquired in attending such patient in a professional capacity, which information was necessary to enable him to act in
that capacity, and which would blacken the reputation of the patient (Sec. 24).

4) A minister or priest cannot, without the consent of the person making the confession, be examined as to
any confession made to or any advice given by him in his professional character in the course of discipline enjoined by
the church to which the minister or priest belongs (Sec. 24).

5) A public officer cannot be examined during his term of office or afterwards, as to communications made to
him in official confidence, when the court finds that the public interest would suffer by the disclosure (Sec. 24).

21. a) What is parental privilege?; b) What is filial privilege?

a) What is parental privilege?;

Parental privilege means that, no person may be compelled to testify against his children or other direct
descendants (Sec. 25).

b) What is filial privilege?

Filial privilege means that, no person may be compelled to testify against his parents, other direct ascendants
(Sec. 25)

Under Art. 215 of the Family Code, the descendant may be compelled to testify against his parents and
grandparents if such testimony is indispensable in prosecuting a crime against the descendant or by one parent against
the other.

22. a) Differentiate admissions from confessions; b) What is the rule on the admissibility of extrajudicial
admissions and confessions?

a)

Admission Confession
An act, declaration or omission of a party as to a The declaration of an accused acknowledging
relevant fact (Sec. 26, Rule 130). his guilt of the offense charged, or of any offense
necessarily included therein (Sec. 33, Rule 130).

It is a voluntary acknowledgment made by a party of It is a statement by the accused that he

the existence of the truth of certain facts which are inconsistent engaged in conduct which constitutes a crime (29 Am.
with his claims in an action (Black‘s Law Dictionary, 5th Ed.). Jur. 708).
Broader than confession.

Specific type of admission which refers only to

an acknowledgment of guilt
May be implied like admission by silence. Cannot be implied, but should be a direct and
positive acknowledgment of guilt.

May be judicial or extrajudicial. May be judicial or extrajudicial.

b)

Extrajudicial admissions and other admissions are, as a rule, and where the elements of estoppels are not
present, disputable.

6 | | ABELLERA,DE C A S T R O , F A J A R D O , G R A N D E , L A C H I C A , M A L I N A O , Q U I J A N O , S A N D I C O
A N D Y M A L A Y N O T E S
 The extrajudicial confession or admission of one accused is admissible only against said accused, but is
inadmissible against the other accused. But if the declarant or admitter repeats in court his extrajudicial admission, during
the trial and the other accused is accorded the opportunity to cross-examine the admitter, the admission is admissible
against both accused because then it is transposed into a judicial admission (Enriquez v. Sandiganbayan [2012]).

An extrajudicial confession is binding only on the confessant. It cannot be admitted against his or her co-accused
and is considered as hearsay against them. It would not only be rightly inconvenient, but also manifestly unjust, that a
man should be bound by the acts of mere unauthorized strangers; and if a party ought not to be bound by the acts of
strangers, neither ought their acts or conduct be used as evidence against him. The exception provided under Sec. 30,
Rule 130 of the Rules of Court to the rule allowing the admission of a conspirator requires the prior establishment of the
conspiracy by evidence other than the confession (Salapuddin v. CA, GR No. 184681, 02/25/2013).

23. What is the rule on the admissibility of an offer to settle/compromise?

The rule on admissibility of Offer to Compromise is foun on Rule 130, Section 27 of the Revised Rules on
Evidence, which states:

Sec. 27. Offer of compromise not admissible. In civil cases, an offer of compromise is not an admission of any
liability, and is not admissible in evidence against the offeror.

In criminal cases, except those involving quasi-offenses (criminal negligence) or those allowed by law to be
compromised, an offer of compromise by the accused may be received in evidence as an implied admission of guilt.

24. a) State the “res inter aliosacta” rule and its exceptions.

The rule on res inter alios acta provides that the rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or
omission of another. Consequently, an extrajudicial confession is binding only on the confessant, is not admissible against
his or her co-accused and is considered as hearsay against them.

An exception to the res inter alios acta rule is an admission made by a conspirator under Section 30, Rule 130 of
the Rules of Court:

Admission by conspirator. The act or declaration of a conspirator relating to the conspiracy and during its
existence, may be given in evidence against the co-conspirator after the conspiracy is shown by evidence other than such
act or declaration.

This rule prescribes that the act or declaration of the conspirator relating to the conspiracy and during its
existence may be given in evidence against co-conspirators provided that the conspiracy is shown by independent
evidence aside from the extrajudicial confession. Thus, in order that the admission of a conspirator may be received
against his or her co-conspirators, it is necessary that (a) the conspiracy be first proved by evidence other than the
admission itself (b) the admission relates to the common object and (c) it has been made while the declarant was
engaged in carrying out the conspiracy. Otherwise, it cannot be used against the alleged co-conspirators without violating
their constitutional right to be confronted with the witnesses against them and to cross-examine them.

25. What is the rule on the admissibility of similar act or previous conduct as evidence?

Rule 130, Section 34 states:

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 did or did not do the same or similar thing at another time; but it may be received to prove a specific intent
or knowledge; identity, plan, system, scheme, habit, custom or usage, and the like. (48a)

26. a) State the general rule on the admissibility of testimonial evidence; b) enumerate the exceptions to
the general rule.

a) State the general rule on the admissibility of testimonial evidence;

7 | | ABELLERA,DE C A S T R O , F A J A R D O , G R A N D E , L A C H I C A , M A L I N A O , Q U I J A N O , S A N D I C O
A N D Y M A L A Y N O T E S
 The general rule for admissibility of testimonial evidence is found on Rule 13, Section 20, which states:

Except as provided in the next succeeding section, all persons who can perceive, and perceiving, can make their
known perception to others, may be witnesses.

Religious or political belief, interest in the outcome of the case, or conviction of a crime unless otherwise provided
by law, shall not be ground for disqualification. (18a)

b) Enumerate the exception to the general rule.

The exception is found on Rule 130, Section 21 which states:

The following persons cannot be witnesses:

(a) Those whose mental condition, at the time of their production for examination, is such that they
are incapable of intelligently making known their perception to others;

(b) Children whose mental maturity is such as to render them incapable of perceiving the facts
respecting which they are examined and of relating them truthfully. (19a)

27. a) State the general rule on the admissibility of the witness’ opinion as evidence; b) enumerate the
exceptions to the general rule.

a) State the general rule on the admissibility of the witness’ opinion as evidence;

As a general rule the opinion of witness is not admissible.

b) Enumerate the exceptions to the rule.

The exceptions are found on Rule 130, Sections 49 and 50 which states:

Section 49. Opinion of expert witness. — The opinion of a witness on a matter requiring special. knowledge, skill,
experience or training which he shown to posses, may be received in evidence. (43a)

Section 50. Opinion of ordinary witnesses. — The opinion of a witness for which proper basis is given, may be
received in evidence regarding —

(a) the identity of a person about whom he has adequate knowledge;

(b) A handwriting with which he has sufficient familiarity; and

(c) The mental sanity of a person with whom he is sufficiently acquainted.

The witness may also testify on his impressions of the emotion, behavior, condition or appearance of a person.
(44a)

28. State the rules on the admissibility of character evidence.

GENERAL RULE: Character evidence is not admissible in evidence.

EXCEPTION:
1. Criminal cases:
a) The accused may prove his good moral character which is pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense
charged;
b) The prosecution may not prove the bad moral character of the accused which is pertinent to the moral trait
involved in the offense charged, unless in rebuttal when the latter opens the issue by introducing evidence of his
good moral character; or
c) As to the offended party, his good or bad moral character may be proved as long as it tends to establish in any
reasonable degree the probability or improbability of the offense charged.

EXCEPTION TO THE EXCEPTION:

8 | | ABELLERA,DE C A S T R O , F A J A R D O , G R A N D E , L A C H I C A , M A L I N A O , Q U I J A N O , S A N D I C O
A N D Y M A L A Y N O T E S
 i. In rebuttal, proof of the bad character of the victim is not admissible if the crime was committed through
treachery and premeditation; and
ii. In rape cases, the evidence of complainant’s past sexual conduct, or reputation or opinion thereof shall not be
admitted unless and only to the extent that the court finds that such evidence is material and relevant to the case (Rape
shield, Sec. 6, R.A. 8505).

2. Civil cases – The moral character of either party thereto cannot be proved unless it is pertinent to the issue
of character involved in the case (Sec. 51).

3. In the case provided for in Rule 132, Section 14 (Note: As to witnesses to both criminal and civil actions,
the bad moral character of a witness may always be proved by either party but not evidence of his good moral character,
unless such character has been impeached (Sec. 14, Rule 132).

29. a) Who has the burden of proof in criminal cases?; b) who has the burden of proof in civil cases?
a) Who has the burden of proof in criminal cases?
1. The Prosecution – because of presumption of innocence;
2. The Accused – when he admits the offense or crime charged but raises justifying, exempting circumstances or
absolutory causes

b) who has the burden of proof in civil cases?

1. The Plaintiff – to show the truth of his allegations if the defendant raises a negative defense’
2. The Defendant – If he raises an affirmative defense

30. a) What is a leading question?: b) Under what circumstances that a leading question may be allowed?;
c) What is a misleading question?; d) under what circumstances that a misleading question be allowed?

a) What is a leading question?

A leading question is one which suggests to the witness the answer which the examining party desires.

b) Under what circumstances that a leading question may be allowed?

A leading question may be allowed under the following circumstances:
1. On cross-examination;
2. On preliminary matters;
3. When there is difficulty in getting direct and intelligible answers from a witness who is ignorant, or a
child of tender years, or is of feeble mind or a deaf-mute;
4. To unwilling witness or hostile witness; or
5. Witness is an adverse party or an officer, director, or managing agent of a public or private corporation
or of a partnership or association which is an adverse party. (Sec. 10, Rule 132).

c) What is a misleading question?

It is one which assumes as true a fact not yet testified to by the witness, or contrary to that which he has
previously stated.

d) Under what circumstances that a misleading question be allowed?

It is not allowed unless waived or when asking hypothetical questions to an expert witness.

31. a) In your own understanding what is meant by “impeaching” a witness?; b) can a party impeach his
own witness?; c) how may counsel impeach the other party’s witness?

. a) In your own understanding what is meant by “impeaching” a witness?

It is a technique employed usually as part of cross-examination to discredit a witness’ testimony by attacking his
credibility.

b) can a party impeach his own witness?

As a general rule, a party may not impeach his own witness. However, it is subject to the following exceptions:
1. the witness is unwilling or adverse witness so declared by the court;
2. the witness is adverse party; or
3. the witness is officer of the adverse party who is a juridical person (Sec. 12, Rule 132).

Note: 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.

c) how may counsel impeach the other party’s witness?

Counsel may impeach the other party’s witness by:

9 | | ABELLERA,DE C A S T R O , F A J A R D O , G R A N D E , L A C H I C A , M A L I N A O , Q U I J A N O , S A N D I C O
A N D Y M A L A Y N O T E S
 1. By contradictory evidence – this refers to the prior testimony of the same witness or other evidence presented by
him in the same case, but not the other witness;
2. By evidence that his general reputation for truth, honesty, integrity of the witness is bad - Since the weight of the
witness’ testimony depends on his credibility, he may be impeached by impairing his credibility by showing his not
pleasing reputation but only as regards his reputation for truth, honesty or integrity;
3. by prior inconsistent statements "laying the predicate" – this refer to statements, oral or documentary, made by
the witness sought to be impeached on occasions other than the trial in which he is testifying.

32. a) When may the good character of a witness admissible in evidence?; b) Is this rule applicable if the
witness if the accused in a criminal case?; c) Is this rule applicable if the witness is the plaintiff in a civil
case?

a) When may the good character of a witness admissible in evidence?

The witness may prove his good moral character when pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense
charged.

b) Is this rule applicable if the witness if the accused in a criminal case?

In a criminal case, the prosecution cannot prove the bad moral character of the accused in its evidence-in-chief.
It can only do so in rebuttal.

c) Is this rule applicable if the witness is the plaintiff in a civil case?

Evidence of the moral character of a party in civil case is admissible only when pertinent to the issue of character
involved in the case.

33. How may you prove the authenticity and due execution of – a) a public document? b) a private
document?
a. A public document

Public documents are admissible in evidence even without further proof of their due execution and genuineness.
(Ernesto L. Salas v. STA. MESA MARKET, GR No. 157766)/ (Sec 19)/ UST Golden Notes page 324.

b. A private document

Rule 132, Sec. 20 of the Rules of Court provides: Proof of private document. — Before any private
document offered as authentic is received in evidence, its due execution and authenticity must be proved either:

(a) By anyone who saw the document executed or written; or

(b) By 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.

34. What is an ancient document? Is there a need to prove due execution or authenticity of an ancient
document?

In the law of evidence, ancient document is a document which is admissible as an exception to the
hearsay rule, and which is considered self-authenticating, because it is older than a certain age (usually twenty
years), in a condition that makes it free from suspicion concerning its authenticity, and was found in a place
where such a writing was likely to be kept.

Requirements for “Ancient Documents”:

a. more than 20 years old;

b. is regular on its face with no signs of obvious alterations; and

c. found in a place of natural custody, or in a place where it would be expected to be found, then
the document is found to be prima facie authenticated and therefore admissible.

10 | | A B E L L E R A , D E C A S T R O , F A J A R D O , G R A N D E , L A C H I C A , M A L I N A O , Q U I J A N O , S A N D I C O
A N D Y M A L A Y N O T E S
 On the other hand, there is no need to prove due execution or authenticity of an ancient document
where a private document is more than thirty years old, is produced from the custody in which it would naturally
be found if genuine, and is unblemished by any alterations or circumstances of suspicion, no other evidence of its
authenticity need be given, (Sec. 21, Rule 132).

35. To prove genuineness of a handwriting, the testimony of an expert witness is indispensable. True or
False? Explain.

False, the testimony of an expert witness is necessary.

Rule 130, Section 48, provides that the opinion of witness is not admissible, except as indicated in the following
sections except,

Opinion of expert witness (Rule 130, Section 49) — The opinion of a witness on a matter requiring special
knowledge, skill, experience or training which he shown to posses, may be received in evidence.

36. a) Can the court consider evidence which have not been formally offered?; b) If there are exceptions,
Can the court consider evidence which have not been formally offered?

a) No, Rule 132, section 34 provides that the court shall consider no evidence which has not been formally offered.
The purpose for which the evidence is offered must be specified. Its function is to enable the trial judge to know the
purpose or purposes for which the proponent is presenting the evidence. On the other hand, this allows opposing parties
to examine the evidence and object to its admissibility. Moreover, it facilitates review as the appellate court will not be
required to review documents not previously scrutinized by the trial court. Evidence not formally offered during the trial
cannot be used for or against a party litigant. Neither may it be taken into account on appeal.

b) If there are exceptions, enumerate them.(UST Golden Notes Pages 360-361)

1. Marked exhibits not formally offered may be admitted provided it complies with the following requisites:
a. must be duly identified by testimony duly recorded; and b. must have been incorporated in the records
of the case (Ramos v. Dizon, G.R. No. 137247, Aug. 6, 2006);

2. Under the Rule on Summary Procedure, where no full blown trial is held in the interest of speedy
administration of justice;

3. In summary judgments under Rule 35 where the judge based his decisions on the pleadings, depositions,
admissions, affidavits and documents filed with the court;

4. Documents whose contents are taken judicial notice of by the court;

5. Documents whose contents are judicially admitted; or

6. Object evidence which could not be formally offered because they have disappeared or have become lost
after they have been marked, identified and testified on and described in the record and became the
subject of cross examination of the witness who testified on them during the trial.

37. a) When should the proponent make the offer of testimonial evidence?; b) When should the
documentary evidence be offered?

A.) when should the proponent make the offer of testimonial evidence?

Under sec. 35 of rule 132 of the Rules of Court, As regards the testimony of a witness, the offer must be made at
the time the witness is called to testify.

B.) when should the the documentary evidence be offered?

11 | | A B E L L E R A , D E C A S T R O , F A J A R D O , G R A N D E , L A C H I C A , M A L I N A O , Q U I J A N O , S A N D I C O
A N D Y M A L A Y N O T E S
 Documentary and object evidence shall be offered 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.

38. a) What is a continuing objection?: b) What is tender of excluded evidence and what is its purpose?

A.) what is a continuing objection?

Under sec. 37 of Rule 132 of the Rules of Court, when it becomes reasonably apparent in the course of
examination of a witness that the questions being propounded are of the same class as those to which objection has
been made, whether such objection was 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.

B.) what is tender of excluded evidence and what is its purpose?

Under sec. 40 of Rule 132 of the Rules of Court, If documents or things offered in evidence 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.

39. The general rule is that, the judge need not state the reason for his/her ruling on an objection. Is there
an exception?

Under sec. 38 of Rule 132 of the Rules of Court, 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. However, 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.

40. What elements must concur so that circumstantial evidence may be sufficient to convict an accused?

The following are the elements must concur so that circumstantial evidence may be sufficient to convict
an accused:

1. There is more than one circumstance;

2. The facts from which the inferences are derived are proven; and
3. The combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce a conviction beyond reasonable doubt.

Wala sa damit, wala sa kulay ang pagmamahal! Nasa puso! Nasa utak!
— Maricel Soriano

12 | | A B E L L E R A , D E C A S T R O , F A J A R D O , G R A N D E , L A C H I C A , M A L I N A O , Q U I J A N O , S A N D I C O
A N D Y M A L A Y N O T E S