Evidence Finals Reviewer

Front 1

Hearsay evidence rule

Back 1

EXCEPT as provided by in these RULES
A witness can testify only to those FACTS
which he knows of his PERSONAL knowledge (Rule 130, sec 36)

Front 2

Hearsay

Back 2

Any EVIDENCE
Its PROBATIVE value is
NOT based on PERSONAL knowledge

Front 3

11 Exceptions to the Hearsay evidence rule

Back 3

DYING declaration (Rule 130, Sec 37)
Declaration AGAINST interest (Rule 130, Sec 38)
Act or declaration about PEDIGREE (Rule 130, Sec 39)
FAMILY reputation or TRADITION regarding pedigree (Rule 130, Sec 40)
COMMON reputation (Rule 130, Sec 41)
RES GESTAE (Rule 130, Sec 42)
Entries in the COURSE of BUSINESS (Rule 130, Sec 43)
Entries in OFFICIAL RECORDS (Rule 130, Sec 44)
COMMERCIAL list (Rule 130, Sec 45)
Learned TREATISES (Rule 130, Sec 46)
Testimony or deposition at a FORMER proceeding(Rule 130, Sec 47)

Front 4

When is a dying declaration admissible as an exception to the hearsay rule?

Back 4

1) death is IMMINENT and the declarant is conscious of that fact;
2) declaration refers to the cause and surrounding CIRCUMSTANCES of such death;
3) that the declaration relates to facts which the victim is COMPETENT to testify to;
4) the declaration is offered in a case wherein the declarant’s death is the SUBJECT OF INQUIRY.

Front 5

A declaration will be deemed as having been made under the consciousness of imminent death in consideration on

Back 5

(a) The words or statements of the DECLARANT on the same occasion
(b) his CONDUCT at the time the declaration was made
(c) The SERIOUS nature of his WOUNDS as would necessarily ENGENDER a BELIEF on his part that he would NOT survive

Front 6

What is a declaration against interest?

Back 6

The DECLARATION made by a person DECEASED, or UNABLE to testify, AGAINST the 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 man in his position would NOT have made the declaration unless he BELIEVED it to be TRUE. (Rule 130, sec 38)

Front 7

Admission against interest v. declaration against interest

Back 7

AI: Made by a PARTY to a litigation or one with LEGAL INTEREST to such party.
Admissible whether or not the declarant is AVAILABLE as a WITNESS
DI: Made by a person NEITHER a PARTY nor in PRIVITY with a party to the SUIT.
Admissible ONLY when the declarant is NOT available as a witness

Front 8

What are the requisites for a declaration against interest?

Back 8

1) the declarant is DEAD or UNABLE to testify;
2) it relates to a fact against the INTEREST of the declarant;
3) at the time he made the declaration, the declarant was AWARE that the same was contrary to his interest;
4) the declarant had NO motive to falsify and BELIEVED such declaration to be true.

Front 9

How may a pedigree of a person be proved

Back 9

(a) Act or declaration of a RELATIVE (Rule 130, sec 39)
(b) REPUTATION or TRADITION existing in the family (Rule 130, sec 40)
(c) ENTIRES in family bible, etc. (Rule 130, sec 40)
(d) COMMON REPUTATION in the community(Rule 130, sec 41)

Front 10

How may pedigree be proven as an exception the hearsay rule?

Back 10

1) the declarant is DEAD or UNABLE to testify;
2) the declaration is made by a person RELATED to the subject by BIRTH or MARRIAGE;
3) the relationship between the declarant and the subject is shown by EVIDENCE OTHER THAN such act or declaration;
4) the declaration was made ANTE LITEM MOTAM (prior to the controversy).

Front 11

How may family reputation be proven as an exception the hearsay rule?

Back 11

1) the witness testifying must be member, by CONSANGUINITY or AFFINITY of the same family as the subject;
2) such reputation must have existed in that family ANTE LITEM MORTAM (prior to the controversy)

Front 12

What is common reputation and what can it prove?

Back 12

Common reputation is general reputation and is admissible to prove:
1) facts of PUBLIC or GENERAL interest more than THIRTY (30) years old; (ante litem motam)
2) MARRIAGE;
3) MORAL CHARACTER character

Front 13

How is common reputation established?

Back 13

(a) TESTIMONIAL evidence of a COMPETENT witness
(b) MONUMENTS and INSCRIPTIONS in PUBLIC places (more than THIRTY (30) years old)
(c)DOCUMENTS containing statements of reputation

Front 14

What is res gestae?

Back 14

Res gestae (“THINGS DONE”) are: 1) statements made by person while a STARTLING OCCURENCE is TAKING place or immediately PRIOR or SUBSEQUENT thereto with respect to the circumstances thereof; 2) statements ACCOMPANYING an EQUIVOCAL ACT MATERIAL to the issue, and giving it LEGAL SIGNIFICANCE. (Rule 130, sec 42)

Front 15

What are the requisites for the first type of res gestae?

Back 15

1) the principal act be a STARTLING OCCURENCE
2) the statements forming part thereof were made BEFORE the declarant had an opportunity to CONTRIVE;
3) the statements refer to the occurrence IN QUESTION and its ATTENDING circumstances.

Front 16

Distinguish res gestae from dying declaration.

Back 16

a) DD can only be made by the VICTIM; RG may be made by the killer or by the THIRD PERSON;
b) DD are made only AFTER the attack has been committed; in RG, the statement may PRECEDE, ACCOMPANY, or made AFTER the act;
c) The trustworthiness of a DD is based upon its being given under awareness of an IMPENDING DEATH; RG is justified because of the SPONTANIETY of the statement.

Front 17

What are the requisites for VERBAL ACTS or the 2nd type of res gestae?

Back 17

1) the PRINCIPAL ACT to be characterized must be EQUIVOCAL;
2) such act must be MATERIAL to the issue;
3) the STATEMENTS must ACCOMPANY the equivocal act, and;
4) the statements must give a LEGAL SIGNIFICANCE to the equivocal act.

Front 18

What are the requisites for entries in the course of business to be admissible as an exception to hearsay rule?

Back 18

a) the person who made the entry must be DEAD or UNABLE to testify;
b) the entries were made AT or NEAR the time of the TRANSACTION to which they refer;
c) the entrant was in a POSITION TO KNOW the facts stated in the entries;
d) the entries were made in the PROFESSIONAL CAPACITY or in the performance of a DUTY’
e) the entries were made in the ORDINARY or REGULAR course of business.

Front 19

What are the requisites for entries in official records to be admissible as an exception to hearsay rule?

Back 19

1) the entries were made by a PUBLIC OFFICER in the performance of his DUTIES or by a person in the performance of a duty enjoined by LAW;
2) the entrant had PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE of the facts stated by him or such facts were acquired by him from REPORTS made by persons under a LEGAL DUTY to submit the same;
3) such entries were duly entered in a REGULAR manner in the OFFICIAL RECORDS.

Front 20

When are learned treatises admissible?

Back 20

a) when the court has taken JUDICIAL NOTICE thereof; or
b) the same are testified to by a witness EXPERT on the subject.

Front 21

What are the requisites of testimony or deposition at a former proceeding to be admissible?

Back 21

a) the witness is DEAD or UNABLE to testify;
b) his testimony or deposition was given in a FORMER case or proceeding between the SAME PARTIES;
c) the former case involved the SAME SUBJECT although on difference causes of action;
d) the issue testified to by the witness is the SAME ISSUE involved in the former case
e) the adverse party had an opportunity to CROSS-EXAMINE the witness in the FORMER case.

Front 22

What is the opinion rule?

Back 22

Generally, the opinion of a witness is NOT admissible.

Front 23

What are the exceptions to the opinion rule?

Back 23

(a) Opinion of EXPERT witnesses;
(b) Opinion regarding IDENTITY or HANDWRITING of a person (ordinary or expert)
(c) MENTAL SANITY (ordinary or expert)
and
(d) IMPRESSIONS of EMOTION,
BEHAVIOR,
CONDITION or
APPEARANCE of a person
(e) ORDINARY matters known to ALLl men of COMMON PERCEPTION.

Front 24

Who is an expert witness?

Back 24

An expert witness is one who belongs to the PROFESSION or CALLING to which the subject matter of the inquiry RELATES and who possesses SPECIAL KNOWLEDGE on questions on which he proposes to express an opinion.

Front 25

Expert evidence is only admissible if

Back 25

(a) the matter to be testified is one that REQUIRES expertise, and
(b) the witness has been qualified as an EXPERT

Front 26

There is no definite standard of determining the degree of skill or knowledge of an expert, it is sufficient that the following are present:

Back 26

(a) TRAINING and EDUCATION
(b) particular first-hand FAMILIARITY with the FACTS of the case
(c) presentation of AUTHORITIES or STANDARDS upon which his opinion is based

Front 27

A tape recording is admissible and given probative value provided that the following requisites are established

Back 27

(a) RECORDING DEVICE was CAPABLE of taking testimony
(b) OPERATOR was COMPETENT
(c) No changes, additions or deletions have been made
(d) the testimony was elicited and VOLUNTARILY made without any kind of inducement
(e) the establishment of the AUTHENTICITY and CORRECTNESS of the recording
(f) the IDENTITY of the speakers
(g) the manner of the PRESERVATION of the recording

Front 28

What are the rules regarding character evidence in criminal cases?

Back 28

1) the ACCUSED may prove his good moral character which is pertinent to the MORAL TRAIT INVOLVED in the offense charged;
2) the PROSECUTION may NOT prove his BAD MORAL character which is pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense charged, UNLESS in 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.

Front 29

What are the rules regarding character evidence in civil cases?

Back 29

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

Front 30

Rule 132, sec 11 & sec 14

Back 30

In both CIVIL and CRIMINAL cases, the BAD MORAL character of a witness may always be PROVED (sec 11, rule 132), but NOT his GOOD MORAL character unless it has been IMPEACHED. (sec 14, rule 132)

Front 31

What is burden of proof? (Rule 131, section 1)

Back 31

Burden of proof or onus probandi is the obligation imposed upon a party who alleges the existence of facts necessary for the prosecution of his action or defense to establish the same by the requisite quantum of evidence.

Front 32

Quantum of evidence required in civil cases (Rule 183, section 1)

Back 32

Preponderance of evidence.

Front 33

Quantum of evidence required in criminal cases.

Back 33

(1) issuance of a warrant of arrest - reasonable ground to believe that the accused committed the offense. (Rule 112, section 1)

(2) filing of an information - prima facie evidence

(3) to sustain a conviction - guilt beyond reasonable doubt (Rule 133, Section 2)

(4) preliminary investigation - such evidence as suffices to engender a WELL-FOUNDED BELIED as to the fact of the commission of a crime and the respondent's probable guilt thereof.

Front 34

Quantum of evidence required in charges of misconduct and
removal of judges

Back 34

(1) misconduct - clear and convincing evidence (People v. Rodriguez)

(2) removal - guilt beyond reasonable doubt (Raquiza v. Castaneda)

Front 35

Quantum of evidence for cases filed before administrative or quasi-judicial bodies.

Back 35

Substantial Evidence

Front 36

Substantial Evidence

Back 36

Relevant evidence as a REASONABLE MIND might accept as sufficient to SUPPORT a conclusion

Front 37

Who has the burden of proof

Back 37

Civil cases - Burden of proof is on the party who would be defeated if no evidence were given on either side

Criminal cases - burden is proof is always on the prosecution

Front 38

How is the burden of evidence determined and who has said burden

Back 38

Burden of evidence is determined by the developments at the trial OR
by the provisions of the substantive law or procedural rules which may relieve the party from presenting evidence on the facts alleged (presumptions, judicial notice and admissions)

Burden of evidence lies with the party who asserts an AFFIRMATIVE ALLEGATION

Front 39

Do negative allegations have to be proved

Back 39

GR: No
Ex: Essential part in the CAUSE OF ACTION or
DEFENSE in a CIVIL CASE or
are ESSENTIAL INGREDIENTS of the offense in a CRIMINAL CASE (Industrial Finance Corp v. Tobias)
Ex to the ex:
Civil cases - Even if the negative allegation is an essential part of the cause of action or defense, it does not have to be proved it is only for the purpose of DENYING the existence of a document which should be in the CUSTODY of the ADVERSE party
Criminal cases - Where the negative of an issue does NOT permit DIRECT PROOF or
where the facts are more immediately within the KNOWLEDGE of the ACCUSED.

Front 40

What need not be proved?

Back 40

1) facts which are presumed (Rule 131);
2) facts which are of judicial notice (Rule 129);
3) facts which are judicially admitted (Rule 129).

Front 41

What is a presumption?

Back 41

An inference of the existence or non-existence of a fact which courts are permitted to draw from the proof of other facts.

Front 42

Presumptions are classified into:

Back 42

(1) Presumptions of law (praesumptiones juris)
(2) Presumptions of fact
(praesumptiones hominis)

Front 43

Presumptions of law are classified into:

Back 43

(1) conclusive (juris et de jure)
(2) disputable (juris tantum)

Front 44

Conclusive presumptions (Sec 2, Rule 131)

Back 44

(a)Whenever a party has, by his own declaration, act, or omission, intentionally and deliberately LED ANOTHER TO BELIEVE a particular thing true, AND TO ACT UPON SUCH BELIEF, he cannot, in any litigation arising out of such declaration, act or omission, be permitted to falsify it:

(b)The TENANT is not permitted to DENY THE TITLE OF HIS LANDLORD at the time of commencement of the relation of landlord and tenant between them.

Front 45

Requisites of the presumption in Rule 131, section (e) - Evidence if willfully suppressed would be adverse if produced.

Back 45

(1) Evidence is MATAERIAL
(2) Party had the OPPORTUNITY to produce the same
(3) Evidence is ONLY AVAILABLE to the said party

Front 46

Presumption of suppression of evidence does not arise when:

Back 46

(1) suppression is not willful
(2) evidence is merely corroborative or cumulative
(3) evidence is at the disposal of both parties
(4) the suppression is an exercise of privilege (People v. Navaja)

Front 47

Requisite before an inference of guilt arising from possession of recently stolen goods can be made

Back 47

(1) crime was actually COMMITTED
(2) committed RECENTLY
(3) stolen property was found in the POSSESSION of the accused
(4) the accused was UNABLE to SATISFACTORILY explain the possession thereof

Front 48

For the presumption of conclusively proving possession (of recently stolen goods), it is necessary that:

Back 48

(1) possession must be UNEXPLAINED by any innocent origin
(2) possession must be FAIRLY RECENT
(3) possession must be EXCLUSIVE (Mabunga v. People)

Front 49

Requisites of the presumption of survivorship (Rule 131, Sec 3(jj))

Back 49

(1) Deaths occurred in a CALAMITY
(2) There are NO particular CIRCUMSTANCES from which it can be INFERRED that one died ahead of another

Front 50

What is judicial notice?

Back 50

It is cognizance of certain facts which judges may properly take and act one without proof because they already know them.

Front 51

When is judicial notice mandatory? (Sec 1, Rule 129)

Back 51

1) existence and territorial extent of states, their political history, forms of government and symbols of nationality;
2) law of nations, admiralty and maritime courts of the world, and their seals;
3) political constitution and history of the Philippines
4) official acts of the branches of the government
5) the laws of nature, measure of tume, and geographical divisions.

Front 52

When is judicial notice discretionary? (Section 2, Rule 129)

Back 52

A court may take judicial notice of matters which are: 1) of public knowledge; 2) capable of unquestionable demonstration; 3) ougth to be known to judges because of the their judicial functions.

Front 53

When is hearing necessary? (Judicial Notice - Section 3, Rule 129)

Back 53

1) during the trial, the court on its own initiative or on request of a party, may announce its intention to take judicial notice of any mater and allow the parties to be heard thereon;
2) after the trial and before judgment or on appeal, the proper court on its own initiative or on request of a party may take judicial notice of any matter and allow the parties to be heard thereon if the such matter is decisive of a material in the case.

Front 54

Instances when the RTC must take judicial notice of Ordinances

Back 54

(1) When required to do so by statute
(2) In case of appeal before then and the inferior court took judicial notice of an ordinance involved in the case
(3) Capable of unquestionable demonstration

Front 55

When may a court take judicial notice of foreign laws?

Back 55

(1) Well and generally known OR
(2) Ruled in other cases before it and none of the parties claim otherwise
(Phil. Commercial & Industrial Bank v. Escolin)

Front 56

What is the doctrine of processual presumption?

Back 56

Absent any evidence or admission, foreign law is presumed to be the same as that of the Philippines.

Front 57

What is a judicial admission?

Back 57

An admission verbal or written made by a party in the course of the proceedings in the same case and does not require proof.

Front 58

When can a judicial admission be contradicted?

Back 58

The admission may be contradicted only by showing that it was made through palpable mistake, OR
that no such admission was made.

Front 59

When may judicial admissions be made?

Back 59

Judicial admissions may be made in: 1) the pleadings of the parties; 2) in the course of the trial either by verbal or written manifestations of stipulations; and 3) in other stages of the judicial proceedings, as in pre-trial of the case.

Front 60

When are judicial admissions in one case admissible at the trial of another case?

Back 60

GR:
When they are PROVED and PERTINENT to the issue involved in the other case
Ex:
1) the admission were made ONLY for purposes of the first case;
2) the same were withdrawn WITH the permission of the court; or
3) the court deems it proper to relieve the party therefrom.

Front 61

How are witnesses examined? (Section 1, Rule 132)

Back 61

The examination of witnesses presented in a trial or hearing shall be done in open court,
and under oath and affirmation.
Unless the witness is incapacitated to speak, or the question calls for a different mode of answer, the answers of the witness shall be given orally.

Front 62

What is the obligation of a witness? (Section 3, Rule 132)

Back 62

A witness must answer questions although his answer may tend to establish a claim against him.

Front 63

What are the rights of a witness? (Section 3, Rule 132)

Back 63

1) to be protected from irrelevant, improper, or insulating 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;
5) Not to give answer which will tend to degrade his reputation, unless it be to the very fact at issue or from which the fact in issue will be presumed. But a witness must answer to the fact of his previous final conviction.

Front 64

A witness may refuse to answer a question under:

Back 64

(1) Right against self-incrimination
(2) RIght against self-degregation

Front 65

What is the right against self-incrimination?

Back 65

A witness may not answer when his answer will tend to subject him to punishment for an offense.

Front 66

What is the right against self-degradation?

Back 66

A witness may not answer when his answer will have a direct tendency to degrade his character.

Front 67

What are the exceptions to the right against self-degradation?

Back 67

1) when the question directed to the very fact at issue or to a fact from which the fact at issue would be presumed;
2) it refers to his previous final conviction of an offense.

Front 68

Immunity statutes may be classified into:

Back 68

(1) Use immunity
(2) Transactional immunity

Front 69

Use immunity

Back 69

Prohibits the use of the witness' compelled testimony and its fruits in any manner in connection with the criminal prosecution of the witness

Front 70

Transactional immunity

Back 70

immunity to the witness from prosecution for an offense to which his compelled testimony relates

Front 71

What is the order of the examination of an individual witness? (Sec 4, Rule 132)

Back 71

Direct, cross, re-direct, re-cross

Front 72

What is direct examination? (Sec. 5, Rule 132)

Back 72

It is the examination-in-chief of a witness by party presenting him on the facts relevant to the issue.

Front 73

What is the extent of cross-examination of witnesses? (Sec. 6, Rule 132)

Back 73

Any matters stated in the direct examination, or connected therewith, with sufficient fullness and freedom to test his accuracy and truthfulness and freedom from interest or bias, or the reverse, and to elicit all important facts bearing upon the issue.

Front 74

What is the extent of the re-direct examination? (Sec. 7, Rule 132)

Back 74

To explain or supplement answers given during the cross-examination. Questions on matters not dealt with during the cross-examination may be allowed by the court in its discretion

Front 75

What is the extent of the re-cross-examination? (Sec. 8, Rule 132)

Back 75

On matters stated in the re-direct examination and
also on such matters as may be allowed by the court in its discretion.

Front 76

What is the rule regarding recalling witnesses? (Sec 5, Rule 132)

Back 76

GR
After the examination of a witness by both sides has been concluded, the witness cannot be recalled without leave of court.
Ex
The court will grant or withhold leave in its discretion as the interests of justice may require.

Front 77

What is a leading question? (Sec. 10, Rule 132)

Back 77

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

Front 78

When may leading questions be asked? (Sec. 10, Rule 132)

Back 78

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) of an unwilling or hostile witness;
5) of a witness who is an adverse party or an officer, director, or managing agent of a public or private corp. or of a partnership or association which is an adverse party.

Front 79

What is misleading question? (Sec. 10, Rule 132)

Back 79

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

Front 80

A witness may be impeached by the party against whom he was called by: (Sec. 11, Rule 132)

Back 80

GR
1) contradictory evidence;
2) evidence that his general reputation for truth, honesty, or integrity is bad;
3) evidence that he has made at other times statements inconsistent with his present testimony; and
4) evidence of bias, interest, prejudice or incompetence.
Ex
but not by evidence of particular wrongful acts
Ex to the ex
conviction of an offense

Front 81

When may a party impeach his own witness?

Back 81

If the witness is:
1) an unwilling or hostile witness;
2) a witness who is an adverse party or an officer, director, or managing agent of a public or private corp. or of a partnership or association which is an adverse party.
3) The witness is not voluntarily offered but required by law to be presented (Fernandez v. Tantoco)

Front 82

When may a party impeach his own witness? (Sec. 11, Rule 132)

Back 82

Only if so declared by the court upon adequate showing of his
adverse interest,
unjustified reluctance to testify, or
his having misled the party into calling him to the witness stand.

Front 83

Hostile or adverse party may be impeached by: (Sec. 11, Rule 132)

Back 83

GR
By presenting him in all respects as if he had been called by the adverse party,
Ex
by evidence of bad character.

He may also be impeached and cross-examined by the adverse party (limited to the subject matter of his examination-in-chief)

Front 84

How can a witness be impeached by evidence of inconsistent statements? (Sec 13, Rule 132)

Back 84

By "laying the predicate":
1) by confronting him with such statements with the circumstances under which they were made;
2) by asking him whether he made such statements;
3) by giving him a chance to explain the inconsistency.

Front 85

Contradictory evidence

Back 85

Other testimony of the same witness, OR
other evidence presented by him in the SAME case

Front 86

Prior inconsistent statements

Back 86

statements, oral or documentary, made by the witness on occasions other than the trial in which he is testifying

Front 87

When is evidence of a good character of a witness admissible?
(Sec 14, Rule 132)

Back 87

after such character of the witness has been impeached.

Front 88

When may witness refer to a memorandum?

Back 88

A witness may be allowed to refresh his memory respecting a fact, by anything written or recorded under his direction at the time when the fact occurred, or immediately thereafter, or at any other time, when the fact was fresh in his memory and he knew that the same was correctly written or recorded; but in such case the writing or record must be produced and may be inspected by the adverse party.
(revival of present memory)

Also, a witness may testify such a writing or record, though he retain no recollection of the particular facts, if he is able to swear that the writing or record correctly stated the transaction made; but such must be received with caution.
(revival of past recollection)

Front 89

What are public documents?
(Sec. 19, Rule 132)

Back 89

1) 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;
2) documents acknowledged before a notary public except last wills and testaments;
3) public records kept in the Philippines of private documents required by law to be entered therein

Front 90

What are private documents?
(Sec. 19, Rule 132)

Back 90

All other writings, not public, are private documents.

Front 91

What are the requisites for admissibility of a copy of a foreign official document?

Back 91

1) must be attested by the officer having legal custody of the records, or by his deputy; AND
2) it must be accompanied by certificate of the Philippine diplomatic or consular representative to the foreign country certifying that such attesting officer has LEGAL CUSTODY of the document. (Valencia v. Lopez)

Front 92

How is the due execution and authenticity of a private document proven? (Sec. 20, Rule 132)

Back 92

1) by anyone who saw the document executed or written; or
2) by evidence of genuineness of the signature or handwriting of the maker.

Front 93

Doctrine of self-authentication

Back 93

Facts in writing could have only be known by the writer

Front 94

Rule of authentication of the adverse party

Back 94

the reply of the adverse party refers to and affirms the transmittal to him and his receipt of the letter in question, a copy of which the proponent is offering as evidence

Front 95

When is authentication of private documents not necessary?

Back 95

1) When it is an ancient document;
2) When it is a pubic document;
3) When it is notarized;
4) When its authenticity and due execution has been expressly or impliedly admitted.

Front 96

How is genuineness of handwriting proven?

Back 96

1) by a witness who actually saw the person writing the instrument; (sec 20[a], Rule 132)
2) by a witness familiar with such handwriting (sec 22, Rule 132) and who can give his opinion thereon;
3) a comparison by the court of the handwriting and admitted genuine specimens; (sec 22, Rule 132)
4) expert evidence. (sec 49, Rule 130)

Front 97

When is authentication of private documents not necessary? (Sec. 22, Rule 132)

Back 97

1) When it is an ancient document;
2) When it is a pubic document;
3) When it is notarized;
4) When its authenticity and due execution has been expressly or impliedly admitted.

Front 98

Proof of official record (Sec. 23, Rule 132)

Back 98

May be evidenced by an official publication thereof, OR
by a copy attested by the officer having legal custody of the record, or by his deputy AND
accompanied by a certificate that such officer has custody if the record in not kept in the Philippines.

Front 99

An authorized public record of a private document may be proved by (Sec. 27, Rule 132)

Back 99

the original record, OR
by a copy thereof,
attested by the legal custodian of the record,
with an appropriate certificate that such officer has the custody.

Front 100

How may judicial record be impeached? (Sec. 29, Rule 132)

Back 100

By evidence of:
1) want of jurisdiction;
2) collusion between the parties;
3) fraud in the party offering the record.

Front 101

Public documents may be proved by

Back 101

(1) original copy,
(2) official publication thereof, or
(3) certified true copy thereof

Front 102

How are alterations to a document explained? (sec 31, Rule 132)

Back 102

1) the alteration that the alteration was made by another, without his concurrence;
2) was made with the consent of the parties affected therein;
3) innocently made;
4) did not change the meaning or the language of the instrument.

Front 103

Why is offer important? (Sec 34, Rule 132)

Back 103

Because the court shall consider no evidence which has not been formally offered.
The PURPOSE for which the evidence is offered must be specified.

Front 104

When is evidence offered? (Sec 35, Rule 132)

Back 104

As regards the TESTIMONY of a witness, the offer must be made at the time the witness was CALLED TO TESTIFY.
.
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.

Front 105

Evidence not formally offered can be admitted by the court provided the following requirements are present (Ramos v. DIzon)

Back 105

(1) same must have been duly identified by testimony duly recorded, AND
(2) the same must have been recorded in the records of the case

Front 106

When should objection be made? (Sec 36, Rule 132)

Back 106

1) Objection to evidence offered ORALLY must be made IMMEDIATELY after the offer is made.
2) Objection to a QUESTION propounded in the course of the oral examination of a witness shall be made as soon as the grounds shall become reasonable APPARENT.
3) An offer of evidence in WRITING shall be objected to within 3 days after notice of offer
UNLESS a different period is allowed by the court.

Front 107

When is repetition of the objection unnecessary? (Sec 37, Rule 138)

Back 107

When it becomes reasonably apparent in the course of the examination of a witness that the questions being propounded are of the SAME CLASS as those to which objection has been made.

Front 108

Burden of proof in civil cases (Sec 1, Rule 133)

Back 108

Preponderance of evidence

Front 109

Burden of proof in criminal cases (Sec 2, Rule 133)

Back 109

Proof beyond reasonable doubt

Front 110

Credibility of a witness

Back 110

His integrity, disposition and intention to tell the truth in the testimony he has given (People v. Rivera)

Front 111

Bias

Back 111

Excites the disposition to see and report matters as they are wished for rather than they are.

Front 112

How to prove conspiracy

Back 112

From the individual acts of the accused, it may be reasonably deduced that they had a common plan to commit the felony.

Requires proof beyond reasonable doubt.

Front 113

Quantum of evidence necessary to prove self-defense

Back 113

Clear and convincing evidence

Front 114

How is alibi given credence

Back 114

Alibi is the weakest defense.
Must be established by clear and satisfactory evidence.
It must appear that the accused was not only in some other place BUT also that it was physically impossible for him to be at the scene of the crime at the time of commission.

Front 115

When is motive essential or relevant?

Back 115

(a) Where the IDENTITY of the assailant is in question
(b) To determine VOLUNTARINESS of the criminal or the SANITY of the accused
(c) To determine from which side the UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION COMMENCED
(d) To determine the SPECIFIC NATURE of the crime committed
(e) To determine whether the shooting was INTENTIONAL
(f) In SELF-DEFENSE, to determine if the accused was not induced by REVENGE,
RESENTMENT or
OTHER EVIL MOTIVE
(g) Where the evidence is CIRCUMSTANTIAL or INCONCLUSIVE and there is a DOUBT whether a crime has been committed or
whether the accused committed it

Front 116

When is an extra-judicial confession a sufficient ground for conviction? (Sec 3, Rule 133)

Back 116

When it is corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti

Front 117

What is corpus delicti?

Back 117

Actual commission by someone of the particular crime charged.

made up of:
(1) the existence of a certain act or result forming the basis of the criminal charge; AND
(2) the existence of a criminal agency as the casuse of the act or result

Front 118

Circumstantial evidence is sufficient for conviction if: (Sec 4, Rule 133)

Back 118

(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

Front 119

Quantum of evidence required in administrative or quasi-judicial bodies. (Sec 5, Rule 133)

Back 119

Substantial evidence.

Front 120

What is substantial evidence?

Back 120

Such kind of relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.

Front 121

What is equiponderance of evidence

Back 121

The scales stand upon an equipoise and nothing in evidence inclines it to either side, the court will find for the defendant. (Yunchengco v. Sandiganbayan)

Front 122

Evidence on motion (Sec 7, Rule 133)

Back 122

When the 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 matters be heard wholly or partly on oral testimony or depositions