CHAPTER I promote substantial justice. (Douglas F.

Anama vs
Philippine Savings Bank, 2012)
PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS -The rule on liberal construction does not mean that
procedural rules are to be ignored or disdained at will
I. BASIC CONCEPTS ON to suit the convenience of the party
EVIDENCE
*Procedural law has its own rationale in the
orderly administration of justice, namely, to ensure the
1. Evidence Defined effective enforcement of substantive rights by
providing for a system that obviates arbitrariness,
Sec. 1, Rule 128 of the Rules of Court provides for
caprice, despotism, or whimsicality in the settlement of
the definition of evidence
disputes (Abrenica vs Law Firm of Abrenica, Tungol
Sec. 1, Evidence defined- is the means sanctioned and Tibayan, 2006; Reyes vs Fil-Estate 2007)
by these rules, of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding
-The liberal construction is not a license to violate
the truth respecting a matter of fact.
procedural requirements. They are designed to
facilitate the adjudication of cases.

DISTINCTION BETWEEN EVIDENCE AND PROOF
EVIDENCE
Is the medium of proof Is the effect or result of
or the means sanctioned evidence
by the rules in
ascertaining the truth
respecting a matter of
fact
*The liberality in their interpretation and
application of the rules applies only in proper cases
PROOF and under justifiable circumstances.
*Concomitant to a procedure adopting a liberal
construction of the rules should be an effort on the
part of the party invoking liberality to explain his
failure to abide by the rules. Abrenica vs Law Firm of
Abrenica, Tungol and Tibayan, 2006, Banez vs Dela
Salle, 2006)

DISTINCTION BETWEEN FACTUM PROBANDUM -In Rural Bankers vs Tanghal-Salvana, the court held
and FACTUM PROBANS that:

FACTUM PROBANDUM FACTUM PROBANS *Obedience to the requirements of procedural

Is the ultimate fact or Is the evidentiary fact or rules is needed if the parties are to expect fair results
facts sought to be facts by which factum therefrom, and utter disregard of the rules cannot
established probandum is to be justly be rationalized by harking on the policy of liberal
established. construction.

*The liberality in the interpretation and

2. What is the nature of the rules on
evidence
-procedural, waivable in character and can be subject
to the stipulation of the parties
-provided it is not contrary to aw, morals, and public
policy
3. Construction of the Rules on evidence
Under the Rules of Court
-it shall be liberally construed in order to promote
their objective of securing a just, speedy and
inexpensive disposition of every action and proceeding
-it is proper where the lapse in the literal observance
of a rule of procedure has not prejudiced the adverse
party and has not deprived the court of its authority.
-Rules of procedure are tools designed to facilitate the
attainment of justice, and courts must avoid their strict
and rigid application which would result in
technicalities that tend to frustrate rather than
application of the rules applies only in proper cases
and under justifiable circumstances
*While it is true that litigation is not a game of
technicalities, it is equally true that every case must be
prosecuted in accordance with the prescribed
procedure to ensure an orderly and speedy
administration of justice (MCA-MBF Countdown Cards
Philippines et al vs MBF Card International, 2012)
-It should be emphasized that the resort to a liberal
application, or suspension of the application of
procedural rules. Must remain as the XPN to the well-
settled principle that rules must be complied with for
the orderly administration of justice.
4. Construction of electronic Evidence Rule
Sec 2, Rule 1 of the Electronic Evidence Rule (AM
No. 06-11-5-SC, October 15, 2007) provides for the
liberal construction of the rules and its origin the object
of which is to promote a just, speedy, and inexpensive
disposition of every action and proceedings. It states
that:
Sec. 2 CONSTRUCTION
HOW WILL THE ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE RULE BE
CONSTRUED?
These Rules shall be liberally construed to
assist the parties in obtaining a just, expeditious and
inexpensive determination if cases.
WHAT IS THE ORIGIN OF THE RULE?
The interpretation of these Rules shall also
take into consideration in the international origin of
Republic Act 8792, otherwise known as the Electronic
Commerce Act.
5. Construction of Child Witness Examination
Rule
Sec 3 of the Rule on Examination of a Child
Witness (AM No. 004-07-SC, December 15, 2000)
Sec. 3 CONSTRUCTION OF THE RULE
This Rule shall be liberally construed:
1. To uphold the best interest of the child, and
2. To promote maximum accommodation of child
witness without prejudice to the cinstitutional
rights of the accused.
6. Rules of Evidence Not Strictly Applied in
Administrative Proceedings
-are not strictly applied in proceedings before
administrative bodies such as the BOM (Atienza vs
Board of Medicine)
7. What are the Kinds of Evidence
1. Object or Real Evidence- kind of evidence
which is directly addressed to the senses of the
court and consists of tangible things exhibited,
viewed or demonstrated in open court (sec. 1,
Rule 130)
2. Documentary Evidence- is an evidence
which consists of writing any material
containing letters, words, numbers, figures,
symbols or other modes of written expression
offered as proof of their contents. (Sec. 2, Rule
130)
3. Testimonial Evidence- is an oral evidence
given by the witness on the witness stand or in
any proceeding.
4. Direct Evidence- is the kind of evidence if
believed proves the fact in issue.
-it is not the only source of the conclusion of the trail
court
-The rules of evidence allow a trial court to rely
on circumstantial evidence to support its conclusion of
guilt.(People vs Federico Lucero, 2011)
5. Circumstantial Evidence- is that evidence
which proves a fact or series of facts from
which the facts in issue may be established by
inference. (De Leon vs People, 2008)
6. Demonstrative Evidence- is the kind of
evidence which demonstrates the real thing.
7. Corroborative Evidence- is the kind of
evidence which merely supplements evidence
which has already been given tending to
strengthen the same.
WHEN IT IS NECESSARY
-only when there are reasons to warrant the suspicion
that the witness falsified the truth or that his
observation had been inaccurate. (People vs Budo,
2013)
TESTIMONY OF AN INFORMANT IS MERELY
CORROBORATIVE AND CUMULATIVE TO THAT OF
THE POSEUR-BUYER
Note:
a. The presentation of an informant does not
vitiate the prosecution’s cause as his testimony
is not indispensable to a successful prosecution
for drug-pushing since it would be merely
corroborative of, and cumulative with, that of
the poseur-buyer who was presented in court
and testified on the facts and circumstances of
the sale and delivery of the prohibited drug.
(People vs Andres, 2011)
b. The alibi and defense of frame-up become less
plausible when they are corroborated only by
relatives and friends because of perceived
impartiality (People vs Reyes, 2009)
8. Cumulative Evidence- is the kind of evidence
which is of the same kind and character
tending to prove the same proposition.
9. Positive Evidence (testimony)- is the kind
of evidence in which a witness affirms that a
fact did or did not occur. (People vs Alfonso,
1978)
Note:
a. Positive Identification where:
1. Categorical and consistent, and
2. Without showing of ill motive on the part of the
eye witness testifying over the matter
-Prevails over a denial which, if not
substantiated by clear and convincing evidence is
negative and self-serving evidence undeserving of
weight in law.
-They cannot be given greater evidentiary
value over the testimony of credible witnesses who
testify on affirmative matters (People vs Piosang,
2013)
 10. Negative Evidence- is a testimony that a
certain fact did not exist.
Note:
a. Denial and Alibi are negative defenses
GR: they are self-serving negative evidence;
they cannot prevail over the spontaneous,
positive, and credible testimonies of the
prosecution witnesses who pointed to and
identified the accused.
11. Prima Facie Evidence- The term “prima facie
evidence” denotes evidence which, if
unexplained or uncontradicted is sufficient to
sustain the proposition it supports or to
establish the facts.
-prima facie means it is sufficient to establish a
fact or raise a presumption UNLESS disproved or
rebutted (Republic vs SandiganBayan, 2011)
12. Conclusive Evidence- is an evidence which
establishes the fact. (US vs Pons)
13. Substantial Evidence- in proceedings before
administrative and quasi-judicial agencies, the
quantum of evidence required to establish a
fact is Substantial evidence or that level of
evidence which a reasonable mind might
accept as adequate to justify a conclusion.
(Sagun vs Sun Ace International Management,
2011)
14. Preponderance of Evidence- is the weight,
credit and value of the aggregate evidence on
either side and is usually considered to be
synonymous with the term “greater weight of
the evidence” or “greater weight of the credible
evidence”
-it is a phrase which means probability of truth
that is more convincing to the court as worthy of belief
that which is offered in opposition thereto (Cavile vs
Litania-Hong, 2009)
-in civil cases, the party having burden of proof
must establish his case by a preponderance of
evidence.
15. Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt- is the
required quantum of evidence in order to
convict an accused.
-A judgment of conviction must rest on nothing
less than moral certainty in an unprejudiced mind that
it was the accused who committed the crime, failing
which the accused must be exonerated.
-If the prosecution failed to discharge its
burden of establishing the guilt of the accused, it is
unnecessary to still pass on the accused’s defense.
(People vs Rubio, 2009)
16. Clear and Convincing Evidence- is a kind of
evidence which establishes in the minds of a
trier of facts a firm belief on the existence of
the fact in issue.
17. Competent evidence- is the kind of evidence
which is not otherwise excluded by the law or
rules.
18. Incompetent Evidence- the kind of evidence
which is excluded by law or by the rules.
19. Relevant Evidence- kind of evidence which
has a relation to the fact in issue. (Sec. 3, Rule
130)
20. Material Evidence- one that is directed to
prove a fact in issue as determined by the
rules on substantive law and pleadings
(Bautista vs Aparece)
21. Rebuttal evidence- is any competent
evidence to explain, repeal, counteract, or
disprove adversary’s proof. It is receivable only
where new matters have been developed by
the evidence of one of the parties and is
generally limited to a reply to new matters
(Ago Timber Corporation vs Abaya, 1978)
22. Sur-Rebuttal Evidence- evidence in reply to
or to rebut new matter introduced in rebuttal.
(Sandakan vs Sero, 1964)
23. Primary Evidence- kind of evidence which
assures the greatest certainty of fact sought to
be proved, and which does not in itself,
indicate the existence of other and better proof
(Delta Motor Sales Corporation vs Bernardo,
1981)
24. Secondary evidence- is any evidence other
than the document itself
Example:
a. A copy
b. Recital of its contents in some authentic
document
c. Recollection of the witness (Sec. 4, Rule 130)
25. Evidence in Chief- is the primary and main
evidence presented by the parties to prove
their cause or defense.
26. Newly discovered Evidence- must be one
that could not, by exercise of due diligence,
have been discovered before the trial in the
court below.
-The determinative test is the presence of due or
reasonable diligence to locate the thing to be used as
evidence in the trial
-For new trial to be granted on the ground of newly
discovered evidence, the following are the conditions:
a. The evidence must have been discovered
after the trial
b. The evidence could not have been
discovered at the trial even with the
exercise of reasonable diligence;
 c. The evidence is material not merely
cumulative, corroborative or impeaching
d. The evidence must affect the merits of the
case and produce a different result if
admitted. (Briones vs People, 2009)
8. Hierarchy if Evidentiary Values
Highest Level- Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt
-Clear and Convincing Evidence
-Preponderance of Evidence
Last- Substantial Evidence
9. What are the Sources of the Rules on
Evidence
1. 1987 Constitution
2. Rules 128-134 of the RoC
3. Resolution of the SC dated March 14, 1989 on
the proposed rule son evidence;
4. Judicial Affidavit Rule (AM No 12-8-8-SC,
effective January 1, 2013)
5. Child Witness Examination Rule (AM No 004-
07-SC, December 15, 2000)
6. DNA Evidence Rule (AM No 06-11-5-SC,
October 15, 2007)
7. Electronic Evidence Rule (AM No 01-7-01-SC)
8. Rule 115 of the Rules on CrimPro
9. RA 4200 Anti-wiretapping Act
10. RA 9372 Human Securities Act
11. Substantive and Remedial Statute
12. Judicial decisions
10. Scope of the Rules of Evidence
Sec. 2, Rule 128 of the Rules of Court provides that
Sec. 2 SCOPE
The rules of evidence shall be the same in all
courts and in all trials and hearings EXCEPT as
otherwise provided by law or these Rules.
11. Scope of the DNA Evidence Rule
Sec. 1 of the DNA Evidence Rule (AM No 06-11-5-
SC) provides that
Sec 1. SCOPE
This Rule shall apply whenever DNA evidence
as defined in Section 3hereof, is offered, used or
proposed to be offered or used as evidence in:
1. All criminal actions
2. Civil actions; and
3. Special proceedings
12. Application of other provisions of the
Rules of Court and the Rules on Evidence
to DNA Evidence Rule
Sec. 2 of the DNA Evidence Rule (AM No 06-11-5-
SC) provides for the rule on the application of other
rules of evidence in DNA evidence.
Sec. 2 APPLICATION OF OTHER RULES ON
EVIDENCE
In all matters not specifically covered by this
Rule, the Rules of Court and other pertinent provisions
of law on evidence shall apply.
13. Application of the Rules of Court to the
Child Witness Examination Rule
Sec 1 of the Child Witness Examination Rule (AM
No 004-07-SC) provides for the rule on the
application of the Child Witness Examination Rule
Sec. 1 APPLICABILITY OF THE RULE
Unless otherwise provided, this Rule shall
govern the examination of child witnesses who:
1. Are victims of the crime
2. Accused of a crime, and
3. Witnesses to crime
It shall apply in all criminal and non-criminal
proceedings involving child witnesses.
14. Scope of Electronic Evidence Rule
Sec 1 of the Electronic Evidence Rule (AM No 01-
7-01-SC) provides that
Sec 1. SCOPE
Unless otherwise provided herein, these Rules
shall apply whenever an electronic document or
electronic data message as defined in Section 2 hereof
is offered or used in evidence.
15. Cases covered by the Rules on Electronic
Evidence
Sec 2 of the Electronic Evidence Rule (AM No 01-
7-01-SC) provides that:
Sec 2. CASES COVERED
These Rules shall apply to all civil actions and
proceedings, as well as quasi-judicial and
administrative cases.
Note:
-Electronic Evidence Rule applies only civil actions and
quasi-judicial and administrative proceedings and not
to criminal cases.
 16. Scope of Application of the Judicial
Affidavit Rule
Sec 1 of the Judicial Affidavit Rule provides that:
Sec 1. SCOPE
This Rule shall apply to all actions, proceedings
and incidents requiring the reception of evidence
before:
1. The Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial
Courts in cities, Municipal Trail Courts,
Municipal Circuit Trial Courts, and the Shari’a
Circuit Courts but shall not apply to small
claims cases under AM No 08-8-7-SC
2. The RTC and the Shari’a District Courts
3. The Snadiganbayan, CTA, CA and Shari’a
Appellate Courts
4. The investigating officers and bodies
authorized by the SC to receive evidence,
including the IBP; and
5. The special courts and quasi-judicial bodies,
whose rules of procedure are subject to
disapproval of the SC, insofar as their existing
rules of procedure contravene the provisions of
this Rule.
6. For purpose of brevity, the above courts,
quasi-judicial bodies, or investigating officers
shall be uniformly referred to here as the
“court”
17. Application of the Judicial Affidavit Rule in
Criminal cases
Sec. 9 APPLICATION OF RULE TO CRIMINAL
ACTIONS
a. This Rule shall apply to criminal actions:
1. When the maximum of the imposable penalty
does not exceed six years;
2. Where the accused agrees to the use of judicial
affidavits, irrespective of penalty involved; or
3. With respect to the civil aspect of the actions,
whatever the penalties involved are.
b. The prosecution shall submit the judicial
affidavits of its witnesses not later than
five days before the pre-trial, serving
copies of the same upon the accused. The
complainant or public prosecutor shall
attach to the affidavits such documentary
or object evidence as he may have,
marking them as Exhibits A, B, C and so
on. No further judicial affidavit,
documentary, or object evidence shall be
admitted at the trial.
c. If the accused desires to be heard on his
defense after receipt of the judicial
affidavits of the prosecution, he shall have
the option to submit his judicial affidavit as
well as those of his witnesses to the court
within ten days from receipt of such
affidavits and serve a copy of each on the
public and private prosecutor, including his
documentary marked as Exhibits 1, 2, 3
and so on. These affidavits shall serve as
direct testimonies of the accused and his
witnesses when they appear before the
court to testify.
18. In what cases will the Rules on Evidence
not apply
Sec 4 Rule 1 of the Rules of Civil Procedure
provides for the rule on the non-applicability of the
provisions of the Rules of Court inclusive of the Rules
of Evidence.
Sec. 4 IN WHAT CASES NOT APPLICABLE
These Rules shall not apply to:
1. Election cases
2. Land Registration
3. Cadastral
4. Naturalization, and
5. Insolvency proceedings
6. And other cases not herein provided for
XPN: by analogy or in a suppletory character and
whenever practicable and convenient.
CASES WHICH ARE NOT DIRECTLY GOVERNED BY
THE RULES OF EVIDENCE
1. Election cases
2. Land Registration
3. Cadastral
4. Naturalization, and
5. Insolvency proceedings
6. And other cases not mentioned in Sec 4 of Rule
1;
7. Labor cases;
8. Impeachment cases
SUPPLETORY APPLICATION OF THE RULES OF
COURT
-The Rules may nonetheless be applied in suppletory
character
-it means that the provision in the Rules of Court will
be made to apply only when there is an insufficiency in
the applicable rule (GSIS vs Villaviza, 2010)
19. Application of the Rules of Court in
Impeachment Trial
-The Rules of Evidence and procedure shall be applied
liberally and whenever they are practicable in
impeachment Trial Cases (Art VI of the Rules of e. Admissibility of the evidence under the
Impeachment Trial in the Senate) Anti-Wiretapping Law
33. Human Securites Act: Admissibility of evidence
20. Application of the Rules of Court in cases a. Rule on Surveillance of Suspects and
of Civil Forfeiture, Assets Preservation, Interception and Recording of
and Freezing of Monetary Instrument, Communications
property, or proceeds representing, b. Formal application for judicial authorization
involving or relating to an unlawful c. Evidentiary value of deposited materials
activity or money laundering offense d. Evidentiary value of deposited bank
under RA 9160, as amended. materials
Sec 1 of AM No 05-11-04-SC, provides for the rule 34. Relevancy and Collateral Matters
on the application of the Rules of Court in case of civil 35. Doctrine of Falsus in Uno Falsus in Omnibus;
forfeiture, assets preservation, and freezing of Not absolute rule of law in our jurisdiction
monetary instrument, property, or proceeds 36. Negative evidence: Rules on Alibi and Denial
representing, involving, or relating to an unlawful 37. Rule on Recantation of Testimony: Effect
activity or money laundering offense under RA 9160 as 38. Rules on the defense of frame-up: Quantum of
amended. evidence in frame-up
39. Failure to immediately report the incident does
Sec. 1 APPLICABILITY not affect the credibility of the witness: not to
be considered a fabricated charge
Xxxx 40. Rules on admissibility of photographic video
and other similar evidence under the rules on
The Revised Rules of Court shall apply
environmental cases
suppletory when not inconsistent with the provisions of
41. Admissibility of Audio, Photographic, Video,
this special rules.
and Ephemeral evidence under the electronic
21. Application of the Rules of Court to Labor evidence rule
Cases a. Rules on admissibility of audio,
photographic, video and ephemeral
evidence under the electronic evidence
rules
22. Admissibility of Evidence
b. Rules on admissibility of ephemeral
23. Admissibility of Electronic Document
electronic communication
24. Manner of Authentication of Electronic
42. Doctrine of Relaxed admissibility of evidence in
Document
writ of Amparo
25. Rule on the admissibility of videotaped and
audiotaped in-depth investigative or disclosure
interviews in child abuse cases.
26. Rule on the admissibility of evidence under the
“sexual abuse shield rule”
27. Use of Deposition and its admissibility
28. Rules on Search and Seizure and the
Admissibility of Evidence
29. Constitutional provisions on the admissibility of
the Evidence in violation of the Rights to
Search and Seizure
30. Rule on Illegal Possession of Dangerous Drugs;
Elements; Admissibility of Evidence; Chain of
Custody Rule
31. Rule on the use of deposition as evidence
32. Anti-wire tapping Law; Admissibility of
Evidence
a. Constitutional provisions on the right to
privacy and communication and
correspondence and the admissibility of
evidence in violation of such right
b. Acts punished under Anti-wiretapping law
(RA 4200)
c. Penalty imposable for commission of
prohibited acts
d. Instances of allowed overhearing of
conversation and its admissibility
CHAPTER III
Rule 129
WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED
I. JUDICIAL NOTICE- what is known, need
not be proved
-it means no more than the court will bring to its aid
and consider without proof of facts, its knowledge of
those matters of public concern which are known
by all well-informed persons. (People vs Lotis,
1982)
1. PURPOSE OF JUDICIAL NOTICE:
a. Taking the place of proof in connection with the
issue in the case;
b. To abbreviate the proceedings.
2. REQUISITES:
a. It must be of general or common knowledge;
b. It must be well and authoritatively settled, and
doubtful and uncertain;
c. It must be known to be within the limits of the
jurisdiction of the court.
3. PRINCIPLES ON WHICH IT IS BASED
a. Convenience- considering that parties will be
relieved of its duty to present proof on facts
which is already judicially known to the judge;
b. Expediency- considering that trial will be
more speedy and expeditious since facts
already known to the judge requires no more
presentation of proof.
4. WHEN IS J.N. MANDATORY
Sec. 1 Rule 129
JUDICIAL NOTICE, WHEN MANDATORY
A court shall take judicial notice, without introduction
of evidence:
a. The existence and territorial extent of states;
b. Their political history;
c. Forms of government and symbols of
nationality;
d. The law of nations- Courts are mandatorily
required to take judicial notice of the Law of
Nations since the Philippines is a member of
the UN, and it is expressly provided under the
Constitution that, “The Philippines renounces
war as an instrument of national policy, adopts
the generally accepted principle of international
law as part of the law of the land and adheres
to the policy of peace, equality, justice,
freedom, cooperation and amity with all the
nations. (Sec 2, Art II Phil Consti)
e. The admiralty and maritime courts of the world
and their seals;
f. The political constitution and history of the
Philippines;
g. The official acts of legislature, executive and
judicial departments of the Philippines;
h. The laws of nature- involving the physical
sciences, specifically biology, include the
structural make-up and composition of living
things such as human beings.
-In Rico Rommel Atienza vs Board of Medicine, the
court held that Editha’s kidneys at the time of her
operation, as with most human beings, were in their
proper anatomical positions.
i. The measure of time, and
j. The geographical divisions.
OTHER MATTERS THAT THE COURT SHOULD TAKE
JUDICIAL NOTICE OF MANDATORILY:
a. Amendment to the Rules of Court;
b. Decisions of the SC- In Secretary of National
Defense vs Manila, which assessed the account
of Manalo to be candid and forthright narrative
of his, and his brother Reynaldo’s abduction by
the military in 2006, there is no compelling
reason for the Court, in the present case, to
disturb its appreciation in Manalo’s testimony
c. Official acts or declaration of the President;
d. Banking practices;
e. Financial status of the government;
f. Powers of the president;
g. Court Records.
COURTS MAY NOT TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE OF
DOCUMENTS
-The documents are not among the matters which the
law mandatorily requires the Court to take judicial
notice of, without any introduction of evidence.
5. WHEN IS J.N. DISCRETIONARY
Sec 2. Rule 129
JUDICIAL NOTICE, WHEN DISCRETIONARY
A court may take judicial notice of matters:
a. which are of public knowledge, or
b. are capable to unquestionable demonstration,
or
 c. ought to be known to judges because of their
judicial functions.
6. WHEN IS HEARING NECESSARY IN J.N.
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE COURTS TO TAKE J.N
OF FOREIGN LAWS: Sec. 3, Rule 129

a. The issue involved is one of fact and not of JUDICIAL NOTICE, WHEN HEARING NECESSARY
law; and During the trial, the court:
b. The foreign law must be proved like any other
fact. 1. On its own initiative, or
2. On request of a party
XPN:
-may announce its intention to take JN of any matter
a. When the court has actual knowledge of the and allow the parties to be heard thereon.
foreign laws;
b. When the court has already ruled upon in a After the trial and before judgment or on appeal,
case involving the said foreign law. the proper court:

-Like any other facts, they must be alleged and 1. on its own initiative , or
proved. 2. On request of a party

-In Merope Enriquex Vda de Catalan vs Louella A. -may take JN of any matter and allow the parties to be
Catalan Lee, the court held that, Australian marital heard thereon if such matter is decisive of a
laws are not among those matters that judges ought to material issue in the case.
know by reason of their official function. The power of
judicial notice must be exercised with caution, and
every reasonable doubt upon the subject should be
resolved in the negative. II. JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS

DOCTRINE OF “PRESUMED-IDENTITY
APPROACH” OR PROCESSUAL PRESUMPTION”
1. JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS
-Where the foreign law is not pleaded or, even if
Sec. 4, Rule 129
pleaded, is not proved, the preumption is that
foreign law is the same as ours. (ATCI Overseas Judicial Admission- is an admission:
Corporation, Amalia G. Ikdal and Ministry of Public
Health-Kuwait vs Ma. Josefa Echin, 2010) a. Verbal, or
b. Written
ARE COURTS MANDATORILY REQUIRED TO TAKE
JUDICIAL NOTICE OF THE LAWS AND MUNICIPAL -made by the party in course of the proceedings of the
ORDINANCES same case, does not require proof.

1. In case of Metropolitan Trial Courts, -The admission may be contradictedonly by:

Municipal Trial Court, Municipal Circuit
a. Showing that it was made through palpable
Trial Courts, they are mandatorily required to
mistake, or
take JN of the laws and the ordinances of the
b. That no such admission was made.
city or municipality where they sit.
2. In case of Regional Trial Courts, they are
mandatorily required to take JN of the laws of
the land. REQUISITES FOR A VALID JUDICIAL ADMISSION:

a. Definite
b. Certain
GR: In case of ordinances, Regional Trial c. Unequivocal
Courts are not mandatorily required to take JN.
XPN: -Otherwise, the disputed fact will not be settled.
1. When it is required bylaw or by the
PURPOSE OF ADMISSION: IT CANNOT BE
statute;
CONTRADICTED EXCEPT THORUGH PALPABLE
2. In case of appeal involving the ordinance;
MISTAKE: LIBERALITY IN APPLICATION OF THE
3. In case of issue of facts which are of
RULES
unquestionable demonstration.
-Every alleged admission is taken as an entirety of the
fact which makes for the one side with the
qualifications which limit, modify or destroy its effect -Correspondingly, facts alleged in the complaint are
on the other side. deemed admissions of the plaintiff and binding upon
him.
-The reason for this is, where part of a statement of a
party is used against him as an admission, the court -The allegations, statements or admissions contained
should weigh any other portion connected with the in a pleading are conclusive as against the pleader.
statement, which tends to neutralize or explain the
portion which is against the interest. DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN JUDICIAL ADMISSION
AND JUDICIAL CONFESSION
-In other words, while the admission is admissible in
evidence, its probative value is to be determined from JUDICIAL ADMISSION JUDICIAL
the whole statement and others intimately related or CONFESSION
-is an admission, verbal -acknowledgement of
connected therewith as an integrated unit.
or written, made by a one’s guilt in the same
-Although acts or facts admitted do not require proof party in the course of case
and cannot be contradicted, however, evidence aliunde the proceedings in the
can be presented to show that the admission was same case
Does not result in Connotes admission of
made through palpable mistake.
liability one’s liability
-The rule is always in favor of liberality in construction May be express or Is always express or
of pleadings so that the real matter in dispute may be implied tacit
submitted to the judgment of the court. Is more of a broader Is only limited to the
scope which includes confession of a person
EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION MADE BY A CO- judicial confession
CONSPIRATOR BECOMES JUDICIAL ADMISSION May be made by any Can only be made by the
IF HE REPEATS THE SAME IN COURT party accused in a criminal
proceeding
-While it is true that statements made by a conspirator
against a co- conspirator are admissible only when
made during the existence of the conspiracy, if the DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN JUDICIAL ADMISSION
declarant repeats the statement in court, his AND EXTRA-JUDICIAL ADMISSION
extrajudicial confession becomes a judicial admission,
JUDICIAL ADMISSION EXTRA-JUDICIAL
making the testimony admissible as to both ADMISSION
conspirators. An admission made in An admission made in
the same case another case or out of
MERE DENIAL FOR LACK OF KNOWLEDGE IS
court admission
INSUFFICIENT: ADMISSION IN THE ANSWER CAN
Need not be proven by Needs to be alleged and
ONLY BE CONTRADICTED BY PALPABLE MISTAKE the party being proved like any other
-A person’s denial for lack of knowledge of things that conclusive on the part of fact.
the admitter, UNLESS it
by their nature he ought to know is not an
was made through
acceptable denial.
palpable mistake or
-An admission in the answer and due execution of the when there is no such
admission made
plaintiff’s actionable document, can only be
contradicted by showing that defendant made such
admission through palpable mistake. INSTANCES WERE JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS CAN
BE MADE:
DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN ADMITTED FACTS AND
PROPOSED FACTS TO BE ADMITTED a. Admissions made in the pleadings
b. Admissions made during pre-trial conference;
-The RoC ha no rule that treats the statements found
c. Admissions made in motions filed before the
under the heading Proposed Evidence as admissions
court;
binding on the party- on the contrary, the RoC has
d. Admissions made by the witness on the
even distinguished between admitted facts and facts
witness stand;
proposed to be admitted during the stage of pre-trial.
e. Admissions made in answer to written request
ALLEGATIONS OF THE PLAINTIFF IN THE for admission;
COMPLAINT ARE DEEMED ADMISSIONS f. Admissions made in the answer in the written
interrogatories;
-A judicial admission is one so made in pleadings filed g. Admissions made in open court during trial
or in the progress of a trial as to dispense with the h. Admission on testimonies, deposition, and
introduction of evidence otherwise necessary to affidavits.
dispense with some rules of practice necessary to be i. Agreement of facts by the parties.
observed and complied with.
 2. COVERAGE OF HYPOTHETICAL
ADMISSION RULE UNDER RULE 16
-When a motion to dismiss is filed, the material
allegations of the complaint are deemed to be
hypothetically admitted.
-This hypothetical admission, extends not only from
the relevant and material facts well pleaded in the
complaint, but also to inferences that may be fairly
deduced from them. (Municipality of Hagonoy Bulacan
et al vs Hon Simeon Dumdum)
3. IMPLIED ADMISSION IN CASE OF A
REQUEST FOR ADMISSION BY ADVERSE
PARTY UNDER RULE 26
Sec. 2 Rule 26 of the 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure
-provides for the rule on the implied admission by
adverse party of the genuineness of any document.
Sec. 2 Implied Admission- Each of the matters of
which an admission is requested shall be deemed
admitted UNLESS, within a period designated in the
request, the party will:
1. File and serve upon the party requesting the
admission a sworn statement either denying
specifically the matters of which an admission
is requested or setting forth in detail the
reasons why he cannot truthfully either admit
or deny those matters. which shall not be less
than 15 days after service thereof, or within
such further time as the court may allow on
motion, the party to whom the request is
directed files and serves upon the party.
2. Within such further time as the court may
allow on motion.
Objections to any request for admission shall
be submitted to the court by the party requested
within the period for and prior to the filing of his sworn
statement as contemplated in the preceding paragraph
and his compliance therewith shall be deferred until
such objections are resolved, which resolution shall be
made as early as practicable.
WHAT IS AN “IMPLIED ADMISSION RULE”
-Each matter must be denied specifically under oath
setting forth in detail the reason why he cannot
truthfully admit or deny.
-the silence of defendant on the plaintiff’s
request for admission amounts to an implied
acceptance of the facts set forth therein with the
effect that plaintiff’s claim stood undisputed. (Manzano
vs Despabiladeras, 2004)
LIMITATIONS ON THE “IMPLIED ADMISSION
RULE”
-The redundant and unnecessarily vexatious nature of
petitioner’s request for admission rendered it
ineffectual, futile, and irrelevant so as to proscribe the
operation of the implied admission rule in Section 2,
Rule 26 of the RoC.
-There being no implied admission attributable to
respondent’s failure to respond, the argument that a
preliminary hearing is imperative loses its point.
(Limos vs Spouse Odones, 2010)
REMEDY OF THE PERSON MAKING AN IMPLIED
ADMISSION
-Motion to be relieved of Implied Admission
4. ADMISSIONS IN CASE OF JUDGMENT ON
THE PLEADINGS
-A motion for judgment on the pleadings admits the
truth of all the material and relevant allegations of the
opposing party and the judgment must rest on those
allegations taken together with such other allegations
as are admitted in the pleadings.
-It is proper when an answer fails to tender an issue,
or otherwise admits the material allegations of the
adverse party’s pleading.
-However, when it appears that not all the material
allegations of the complaint were admitted in the
answer for some of them were either denied or
disputed, and the defendant has set up certain special
defenses which, if proven, would have the effect of
nullifying plaintiff’s main cause of action, judgment on
the pleadings cannot be rendered. (Municipality of Tiwi
vs Antonio B. Betito)
5. IMPLIED JUDICIAL ADMISSION IN CASE
OF OFFER OF COMPROMISE IN CRIMINAL
CASES
Sec. 27, Rule 130 of the RoC provide for the rule
son offer of compromise. It states that—
Sec. 27. Offer of compromise not admissible-
Xxx
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.
EFFECT OF AN OFFER OF COMPROMISE IN
CRIMINAL CASES
- may be received in evidence as an implied admission
of guilt
 6. JUDICIAL ADMISSION IN CASE OF PLEA
OF GUILTY TO A LESSER OFFENSE
During the arraignment, the accused with the
consent of the prosecutor and the offended party may
be allowed to make a plea to a lesser offense.
Sec 2 Rule 116 provides that:
Sec 2. Plea of guilty to a lesser offense-
At the arraignment, the accused with the consent of
the offended party and the prosecutor, may be allowed
by the trail court to plead guilty to a lesser offense
which is necessarily included in the offense charged.
After arraignment but before trial, the accused
may still be allowed to plead guilty to said lesser
offense after withdrawing his plea of not guilty. No
amendment of the complaint or information is
necessary.
NATURE OF THE PLEA OF GUILTY TO A LESSER
OFFENSE BY THE ACCUSED
-In case the accused pleads guilty to a lesser
offense, it is equivalent to a judicial admission of an
offense and all the ingredients necessarily included in
the offense charged contained in the former
information.
REQUISITES IN CASE THE ACCUSED WOULD
PLEAD TO A LESSER OFFENSE
During the arraignment, the court may allow the
accused to make a plea to a lesser offense which is
necessarily included in the offense charged, subject to
the following rules:
a. The plea to a lesser offense must be made by
the accused with the consent of the offended
party and the prosecutor, and
b. After arraignment but before trial, the
accused may still be allowed to plead guilty to
said lesser offense after withdrawing his plea
of not guilty. No amendment of the complaint
or information is necessary.
7. JUDICIAL ADMISSION IN CASE OF PLEA
OF GUILTY TO A CAPITAL OFFENSE
The court is required to make an inquiry on the
voluntariness and full comprehension of the pela of the
accused to a capital offense. Sec 3, Rule 116 of the
RoC specifically mandates:
Sec. 3. PLEA OF GUILTY TO A CAPITAL OFFENSE;
RECEPTION OF EVIDENCE
When the accused pleads guilty to a capital offense,
a. the court shall conduct a searching inquiry into
the voluntariness and full comprehension of
the consequences of his plea and
b. shall require the prosecution to prove his guilt
and the precise degree of culpability.
c. The accused may present evidence in his
behalf.
8. JUDICIAL ADMISSION IN CASE THE
ACCUSED PLEADS GUILTY TO A NON-
CAPITAL OFFENSE
In case the accused pleads guilty to a non-capital
offense the court will receive evidence for the
determination of the penalties to be imposed. Sec. 4,
Rule 116 provides that:
Sec. 4 PLEA OF GUILTY TO NON-CAPITAL
OFFENSE; RECEPTION OF EVIDENCE,
DISCRETIONARY
When the accused pleads guilty to a non-capital
offense, the court may receive evidence from the
parties to determine the penalty to be imposed.
-The court is duty bound to receive evidence from the
parties for the determination of the penalty
FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE COURT IN
THE EXERCISE OF DISCRETION IN CASE OF PLEA
OF GUILTY
-In the exercise of discretion of the judge, he should
take into consideration the gravity of the offense
charged and the probability that the accused did not
actually understand fully the meaning of his plea and
the consequence thereof. (People vs Acosta, People vs
De Mesa)
CHAPTER IV LIMITATIONS ON THE ADMISSION OF OBJECT OR
REAL EVIDENCE AND EXCEPTIONS
RULE 130 GR: Object or real evidence may be refused
admittance by the court on the following grounds:
RULES OF ADMISSIBILITY
1. When the object evidence is repulsive or its
I. BASIC CONCEPTS ON CLASSES OF exhibition is contrary to public policy, morals,
EVIDENCE or sense of decency;
A. THREE MAJOR KINDS OF EVIDENCE 2. When it would result only in delays,
1. THREE MAJOR KINDS OF EVIDENCE inconvenience, or would entail unnecessary
UNDER THE RULES expenses;
a. Object or Real evidence or “Autoptic 3. When it is confusing or misleading (ex: when
Proference” (evidence of one’s its purpose is to prove the former condition of
senses) is the kind of evidence which is the object;
directly addressed to the sense of the court 4. When there is a testimonial or documentary
and consists of tangible things exhibited, evidence already presented which already
viewed or examined in open court. described the object
b. Documentary evidence is an evidence
which consist of writing or any material XPNS:
containing letters, words, numbers,
figures, symbols, or other modes of written 1. When the object evidence is necessary in the
expression offered as proof of their interest of justice;
contents; and 2. When the immoral object is the very basis of
c. Testimonial evidence or “Viva voce the prosecution of the civil or criminal case.
evidence” is an oral evidence given by the INSTANCES WHERE A DOCUMENT IS
witness on the witness stand or in any CONSIDERED AS OBJECT OR REAL EVIDENCE
proceeding
II. OBJECT EVIDENCE A document may be considered as an object or
A. OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE real evidence when its purpose is based on the
following: (ENDA)
Sec. 1 Rule 130. Object as evidence
1. When it tends to prove the existence or
-Objects as evidence are those addressed to the sense non-existence of a document;
of the court. When an object is relevant to the fact in 2. When the purpose is to prove the nature of
issue, it may be exhibited to, examined or viewed by the handwriting in the document;
the court. 3. When the intention of the party is to
SCOPE OF OBJECT/REAL EVIDENCE: determine the age of the paper or
material used;
1. Sense of vision 4. When its purpose is to prove the alterations,
2. Sense of hearing (auditory) blemishes or forgery in a document.
3. Sense of touch (tactile)
4. Sense of taste (gustatory); and B. RULES ON CHAIN OF CUSTODY ON DRUGS AS
5. Sense of smell (olfactory) OBJECT EVIDENCE
1. CHAIN OF CUSTODY RULE- is the duly
EFFECTS IF THE OBJECT EVIDENCE IS RELEVANT recorded authorized movements and custody
TO THE FACT IN ISSUE: of seized drugs or controlled chemicals or plant
1. May be exhibited; sources of dangerous of dangerous drugs or
2. Examined; or laboratory equipment of each stage, from the
3. Viewed by the court. time of seizure/confiscation to receipt in the
forensic laboratory to safekeeping to
REQUISITES FOR THE ADMISSIBILITY OF OBJECT presentation in court for destruction. (People
EVIDENCE vs Alivio, 2011)
-such record of movements and custody of
1. It must be relevant; seized item shall include the:
2. It must be authenticated; a. identity and signature of the person
3. It must be identified by a competent witness; who held temporary custody of the
4. It must be formally offered. seized item,
b. the date and time when such transfer
of custody were made in the course of
safekeeping and use in court as
evidence, and
 c. the final disposition
-while a perfect chain of custody is almost
always impossible to achieve, an unbroken chain
becomes indispensable and essential in the
prosecution of drug cases owing to its susceptibility
to alteration, tampering, contamination and even
substitution and exchange. Hence, every link must
be accounted for.
-the presumption of regularity in the
performance of official duty obtains only where
nothing in the records is suggestive of the fact that
the law enforcers involved deviated from the
standard conduct of official duty as provided for in
the law- otherwise, the official act in question is
irregular on its face, an adverse presumption
arises as a matter of course. (People vs Labag,
2011)
2. PURPOSE AND FUNCTION OF THE CHAIN
CUSTODY REQUIREMENT
-ensuring that the integrity and evidentiary value
of the seized items are preserved, so much so that
unnecessary doubts as to the identity of the evidence
are removed
-the unbroken link in the chain of custody also
precluded the possibility that a person, not in the
chain, ever gained possession of the seized evidence
(People vs Alivio, 2011)
3. UNBROKEN CHAIN OF CUSTODY IN DRUG
CASES IS MANDATORY
-as long as the chain of custody remains unbroken,
even though the procedural requirements provided for
in Sec 21 of RA 9165 was not faithfully observed, the
guilt of the accused will not be affected (People vs
Manlangit, 2011)
4. WHEN TO ESTABLISH CHAIN OF CUSTODY
-from the time the seized drugs were confiscated and
eventually marked until the same is presented during
trial (People vs Santiago, 2011)
5. FAILURE TO FOLLOW THE PROPER
PROCEDURE FOR THE CUSTODY
OFCONFISCTAED DRUGS WOULD RESULT
IN ACQUITTAL
-even prior to the passage of RA 9165, shows that the
SC did not hesitate to strike down convictions for
failure to follow the proper procedure for the custody
of confiscated dangerous drugs.
-Prior to RA 9165, the SC applied the procedure
required by Dangerous Drugs Board Regulation No. 3,
S. of 1979, amending Board Regulation No. 7, Series
of 1974.
-Non-compliance with the express requirements under
paragraph 1 Section 21, Article II of RA 9165 justified
where the prosecution recognized the procedural
lapses, and therefore explained the cited justifiable
grounds,, and when the prosecution established that
the integrity and evidentiary value of the evidence
seized has been preserved. (People vs Navarette,
2011)
6. REQUIREMENTS FOR THE MARKING OF
SEIZED DRUGS
-the chain of custody rule requires that the marking of
the seized items should be done:
a. in the presence of the apprehended violator
and
b. immediately upon confiscation to ensure that
they are the ones offered in evidence.
-while the rule allows the marking of evidence to be
done in the nearest police station, this contemplates a
case of warrantless searches and seizures.
-Failure to comply with the marking of evidence
immediately after confiscation constitutes a first gap in
the chain of custody.
-Non-compliance with the prescribed procedures does
not necessarily result in the conclusion that the identity
of the seized drugs has been compromised so that an
acquittal should follow as long as the prosecution can
demonstrate that the integrity and evidentiary value of
the evidence seized has been preserved (People vs
Alcuizar, 2011)
7. MANDATORY MARKING OF THE SEIZED
EVIDENCE
-Marking after seizure is the starting point in the
custodial link, thus it is vital that the seized contraband
is immediately marked because succeeding handlers of
the specimen will use the markings as reference
(People vs Capuno, 2011)
8. EFFECT OF FAILURE TO MAKE AN
IMMEDIATE MARKING OF THE SEIZED
EVIDENCE
-will not automatically impair the integrity of chain of
custody as long as the integrity and the evidentiary
value of the seized items have been preserved, as
these would be utilized in the determination of the guilt
or innocence of the accused. (People vs Morales, 2011)
9. RULE ON THE TESTIMONY OF THE CHAIN
OF CUSTODY
-testimony about a perfect chain is not always the
standard as it is almost always impossible to obtain an
unbroken chain. (People vs Quiamanlon, 2011)
 10. WITNESSES WHO WILL ESTABLISH THE
CUSTODIAL LINK
-the marking of the captured items immediately after
they are seized from the accused is the starting point
in the custodial link
 this step is vital because succeeding
handlers of the specimens will use the
markings as reference.
 Failure to place such markings paves
the way for swapping, planting and
contamination of the evidence.
 These lapses seriously cast doubt on
the authenticity of the corpus delicti,
warranting acquittal on reasonable
doubt.
GR: The police chemist who examines a seized
substance should ordinarily testify that:
a. He received the seized article as
marked, properly sealed and intact;
b. He resealed it after examination of the
content; and that
c. He placed his own marking on the
same to ensure that it could not eb
tampered pending trial.
XPN: In case the parties stipulate to dispense with the
attendance of police chemist, they should stipulate that
the latter would have testified that he took the
precautionary steps mentioned (People vs Pallaya,
2011)
11. WHEN TO ESTABLISH THE CHAIN OF
CUSTODY OF EVIDENCE
-from the time the seized drugs were confiscated and
eventually marked until the same is presented during
trial (People vs Santiago, 2011)
12. EFFECTS OF NON-COMPLIANCE WITH SEC
21 OF RA 9165
a. Non-compliance with Section 21, RA 9165 does not
render an accused’s arrest illegal or items
seized/confiscated from him inadmissible (People
vs Dela Cruz, 2011)
b. The SC upheld the conviction of the accused by
ruling that the failure of the policemen to make a
physical inventory and photograph of the two
plastic containing shabu subject of the case do not
render the confiscated items inadmissible in
evidence.
 Likewise, the failure of the policemen to
mark the two plastic sachets containing
shabu at the place of arrest does not
render the confiscated items inadmissible
in evidence.
c. The IRR of RA 9165 provides that the physical
inventory of the seized items may be done at the
nearest police station, if the same cannot be
done at the place where the items were seized.
 However, it must be emphasized that the
IRR also provides that non-compliance with
these requirements under justifiable
grounds, as long as the integrity and the
evidentiary value of the seized/confiscated
items are properly preserved by the
apprehending officer/ team, shall not
render void and invalid such seizures
and custody over said items
-Accordingly, non-compliance with the procedure shall
not render void and invalid the seizure and custody of
the drugs only when:
i. Attended by justifiable grounds
ii. The integrity and evidentiary value of the
seized items are properly preserved by the
apprehending team
 There must be proof that these 2
requirements were met before such non-
compliance may be said to fall within the
scope of the proviso (People vs DelaCruz,
2008)
-The failure to establish, through convincing proof that
the integrity of the seized items has been adequately
preserved through an unbroken chain of custody is
enough to engender reasonable doubt on the guilt of
an accused. (People vs Danzil, 2010)
13. WHEN TO MAKE MARKING OF EVIDENCE
-should be done in the presence of the apprehended
violator and immediately upon confiscation to
ensure that they are the same items that enter the
chain and are eventually offered as evidence.
-warrantless searches and seizure: done at the
nearest police station
14. PROMPT MARKING OF THE SEIZED ITEMS
VITAL
-because it serves as the starting point in the custodial
link and succeeding handlers of the specimens often
use the marking as reference.
15. WHERE TO MAKE THE PHYSICAL
INVENTORY OF THE SEIZED DRUGS:
EFFECTS OF NON-COMPLIANCE
-The IRR of RA 9165, provides that the physical
inventory of the seized items may be done at the
nearest police station, if the same cannot be done at
the place where the items were seized.
 However, non-compliance with these
requirements under justifiable grounds,
as long as the integrity and evidentiary
value of the seized items are properly
preserved shall not render void and invalid
the seizure and custody of the drugs.
 16. EFFECTS OF FAILURE TO STRICTLY
COMPLY WITH THE PHYSICAL INVENTORY
AND PHOTOGRAPHING OF THE SEIZED
DRUGS
-does not necessarily render an accused’s arrest illegal
or the items seized or confiscated from him
inadmissible.
-In People vs Resurreccion, 2009, it was held that the
failure of the policemen to immediately mark the
confiscated items does not automatically impair the
integrity of chain of custody (People vs Francisco,
2011)
17. IDENTIFYING MARKS BY THE POLICE
OFFICER ON THE SEALED PLASTIC
SACHET CONTAINING DRUGS
-Since the custody and possession of the drugs usually
change from the time they are seized to the time they
are presented in court, it is indispensable that:
a. If the drugs are already in sealed plastic
sachets- the police officer involved immediately
place identifying marks on the cover.
b. If the drugs are noin a sealed container- the
officer is to place them in a sealed container, seal
the container and put his marking on the cover.
-In this way there is assurance that the drugs would
reach the crime laboratory analyst in the same
condition it was seized from the accused (People vs
Ulep, 2011)
18. CHAIN OF CUSTODY REQUIREMENTS
-In every prosecution for illegal sale of dangerous
drug, what is crucial is:
a. the identity of the buyer and seller
b. the object, and
c. its consideration.
d. The delivery of the thing sold, and the
payment thereof.
- The chain of custody requirements that must be
met are as follows:
a. Testimony that every link in the chain, from
the moment it was picked up to the time it is
offered in evidence; and
b. Witnesses should describe the precautions
taken to ensure that there had been no change
in the condition of the item and no opportunity
for someone not in the custody of the chain to
have possession of the item. (Malilin vs People,
2011)
19. RULE ON THE IMMEDIATE PLACING OF
MARKINGS ON THE SEIZED DRUGS
-Since the custody and possession of the drugs usually
change from the time they are seized to the time they
are presented in court, it is indispensable that:
a. If the drugs are already in sealed
plastic sachets- the police officer
involved immediately place identifying
marks on the cover.
b. If the drugs are not in a sealed
container- the officer is to place them
in a sealed container, seal the
container and put his marking on the
cover.
-In this way there is assurance that the drugs would
reach the crime laboratory analyst in the same
condition it was seized from the accused (People vs
Ulep, 2011)
20. CORPUS DELICTI IN PROSECUTION FOR
ILLEGAL DRUGS
-In prosecution involving narcotics and other illegal
substances, the substance itself is the corpus
delicti of the offense and the fact of its existence is
vital to sustain a judgment of conviction beyond
reasonable doubt.
-The chain of custody requirement is essential to
ensure that doubts regarding the identity of the
evidence are removed through the monitoring and
tracking of the movements of the seized drugs from
the accused, to the police, to the forensic chemist and
finally to the court. (People vs Sitco, 2010)
-In other words, the existence of the dangerous
drug is a condition sine qua non for conviction
(People vs De Guzman, 2010)
21. RULE ON THE PRESUMPTION OF
REGULARITYIN THE PRESERVATION OF
SEIZED DRUGS
-the unjustified failure of the police officers to show
that the integrity of the object evidence was properly
preserved negates the presumption of regularity
accorder to acts undertaken by police officers in the
pursuit of their official duties. (People vs Navarette,
2011)
22. MODE OF AUTHENTICATING THE
EVIDENCE IN THE CHAINOF CUSTODY
REQUIRES PRESENTATION OF THE SEIZED
PROHIBITED DRUGS
-the presentation of the seized prohibited rugs as an
exhibit be preceded by evidence sufficient to support a
finding that the matter in question is what the
proponent claims it to be.
-this would ideally cover the testimony about every
link in the chain, from seizure of the prohibited drug up
to the time it is offered in evidence, in such a way that
everyone who touched the exhibit would describe how
and from whom it was received, to include, as much as
possible a description of the condition in which it was
delivered to the next in link.
C. DNA EVIDENCE RULE IN RELATION TO
OBJECT EVIDENCE
1. APPLICATION OF THE RULES OF COURT
Sec. 2 of the DNA Evidence Rule (AM No. 06-11-
5-SC) provides for the application of the rules on
evidence
Sec 2. APPLICATION OF OTHER RULES ON
EVIDENCE
-In all matters not specifically covered by this Rule, the
Rules of Court and other pertinent provisions of law on
evidence shall apply.
2. DEFINITION OF TERMS
Sec 3 of the DNA Evidence Rule (AM No. 06-11-5-
SC) provides for the definition of terms under the
rules. It states that:
Sec. 3 DEFINITION OF TERMS
a. Biological sample- means any organic material
originating from a person’s body, even if found in
inanimate objects, that is susceptible to DNA
testing. This includes blood, saliva and other body
fluids, tissues, hairs and bones.
b. DNA- means deoxyribonucleic acid which is the
chain of molecules found in every nucleated cell of
the body. The totality of an individual’s DNA is
unique for the individual EXCEPT identical twins.
 DNA is the fundamental building block of a
person’s entire genetic make-up. DNA is
found in all human cells and is the same in
every cell of the same person. Hence, a
person’s DNA profile can determine his
identity.
c. DNA Evidence- constitutes the totality of the DNA
profiles, results and other genetic information
directly generated from DNA testing of biological
samples;
d. DNA Profile- means genetic information derived
from DNA testing of biological sample obtained
from a person, which biological sample is clearly
identifiable as originating from that person;
e. DNA Testing- means verified and credible
scientific methods which include the extraction of
DNA from biological samples, the generation of
DNA profiles and the comparison of the information
obtained from the DNA testing of biological
samples for the purpose of determining, with
reasonable certainty, whether or not the DNA
obtained from two or more distinct biological
samples originates from the same person (direct
identification) or if the biological samples
originate from related persons (kinship analysis);
and
f. Probability of Percentage- means the numerical
estimate for the likelihood of parentage of a
putative parent compared with the probability of a
random match of 2 unrelated individuals in a given
population.
DNA Analysis- procedure in which DNA extracted
from a biological sample obtained from an individual is
examined.
 The DNA is processed to generate a
pattern, or a DNA profile, for the individual
from whom the sample is taken.
 This DNA profile is unique for each person,
EXCEPT for identical twins.
3. APPLICATION FOR DNA TESTING
Sec 4 of the DNA Evidence Rule (AM No. 06-11-5-
SC) provides for the requirement of DNA Testing
Order. It states that:
Sec. 4 APPLICATION FOR DNA TESTING ORDER
-The appropriate court may, at any time, either motu
proprio or on application of any person who has a legal
interest in the matter in litigation, order a DNA testing.
Such order shall issue after due hearing and notice to
the parties upon a showing of the following:
a. A biological sample exists that is relevant to the
case;
b. The biological sample:
i. Was not previously subjected to the type of
DNA testing now requested; or
ii. Was previously subjected to DNA testing,
but the results may require confirmation
for good reason.
c. The DNA testing uses a scientifically valid
technique
d. The DNA testing has the scientific potential to
produce new information that is relevant to the
proper resolution of the case; and
e. The existence of other factors, if any, which the
court may consider as potentially affecting the
accuracy or integrity of the DNA testing. This Rule
shall not preclude a DNA testing, without need of a
prior court order, at the behest of any party,
including law enforcement agencies, before a suit
or proceeding is commenced.
Note:
SUBJECT OF THE HEARING IN
ASCERTAINING THE FEASIBILITY OF DNA
TESTING
-The hearing should be confined to ascertaining the
feasibility of DNA testing with due regard to the
standards set in Section 4 (a), (b), (c) and of the
Rules.
 DNA TESTING, ISSUE ON NULLITY OF
MARRIAGE, LEGITIMACY AND FILIATION
NOT AVAILABLE IN A PETITION FOR
CORRECTION OF ENTRIES
-In a special proceeding for correction of entry under
Rule 108, the trial court has no jurisdiction to nullify
marriages and rule on legitimacy and filiation.
-Substantial or contentious alterations may be allowed
only in adversarial proceedings, in which all
interested parties are impleaded and due process is
properly observed.
NON-PATERNITY OF THE ACCUSED THRU
DNA TEST WILL NOT NEGATE THE CRIME
OF RAPE
1. Pregnancy and the subsequent birth of the
child are not elements of the crime of rape.
Non-paternity of the appellant, will not
necessarily negate the crime of rape as
positively proved and established by credible
testimony.
 There may or may not be conception
after the commission of the crime of
rape because the offense may be
consummated even without full
penetration or even complete
ejaculation on the part of the assailant.
 The Court has time and again stressed
that among the most important
consideration in a rape case is the
credible testimony of the victim.
 The Court has repeatedly held that
when a woman says she has been
raped, her declaration alone is all that
is necessary to show that she had
indeed been raped and her sole
testimony is sufficient if it satisfies the
exacting standard of credibility needed
to convict the accused.
2. For the conviction of the accused, the
pregnancy of the victim is not required to be
proved, since it is sufficient that the
prosecution establish beyond reasonable
doubt, that the accused had forced sexual
relations with the victim.
ISSUE OF DNA TEST MUST BE BROUGHT
DURING THE PROCEEDINGS OTHERWISE
WAIVED
MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED IN DNA
TESTING; BURDEN AND QUANTUM OF
EVIDENCE
-During the hearing on the motion for DNA testing, the
petitioner must present prima facie evidence or
establish reasonable possibility of paternity.
-the Rule shall not preclude a DNA testing, without
need of a prior court order, at the behest of any party,
including law enforcement agencies, before a suit or
proceeding is commenced.
-this does not mean however that a DNA testing order
will be issued as a matter of right if, during the
hearing, the said conditions are established.
 Thus, during the hearing on the motion for
DNA testing, the petitioner must present prima
facie evidence or establish a reasonable
possibility of paternity.
-the issuance of a DNA testing order remains
discretionary upon the court.
-the court may consider whether there is absolute
necessity of for the DNA testing
-If there is already preponderance of evidence to
establish paternity and the DNA test result would only
be corroborative, the court may, in its discretion
disallow a DNA testing.
FAILURE TO PRODUCE THE SEMEN
SPECIMEN NOT A GROUND FOR
ACQUITTAL
-there is no right for acquittal due to loss of DNA
evidence.
4. COURSES OF ACTION OF THE COURT ON
THE APPLICATION
Sec. 5 of the DNA Evidence Rule (AM No. 06-11-
5-SC) provides for the rule on the actions that may be
included in the DNA Testing Order.
Sec. 5 DNA TESTING ORDER
-If the court finds that the requirements in Section 4
hereof have been complied with, the court shall:
a. Order, where appropriate, that biological samples
be taken from any person or crime scene evidence;
b. Impose reasonable conditions on DNA testing
designed to protect the integrity of the biological
sample, the testing process and the reliability of
the test results, including the condition that the
DNA test results shall be simultaneously disclosed
to parties involved in the case; and
c. If the biological sample taken is of such amount
that prevents the conduct of confirmatory testing
by the other or the adverse party and where
additional biological samples of the same kind can
no longer be obtained, issue an order requiring all
parties to the case or proceedings to witness the
DNA testing to be conducted.
NATURE OF THE DNA TESTING ORDER
-immediately executory and shall not be appealable
-The grant of a DNA testing application shall not be
construed as an automatic admission into evidence of
any component of the DNA evidence that may be
obtained as a result thereof.
REMEDY
-Petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45
-Any petition for certiorari shall not stay the
implementation thereof, UNLESS a higher court issues
an injunctive order
In case of refusal to comply for DNA testing:
a. Enter a default judgment at the request of
the appropriate party;
b. If a trial is held, allow the disclosure of the fact
of the refusal UNLESS good cause shown for
not disclosing the fact of refusal.
DNA SAMPLES TAKEN FROM THE PARTY DOES
NOT VIOLATE THE RIGHT OF THE ACCUSED
AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION
-because this privilege applies only to evidence that is
“communicative” in essence taken under duress.
-The right against self-incrimination is just a
prohibition on the use of physical or moral compulsion
to extort communication (testimonial evidence) from a
defendant, not an exclusion of evidence taken from his
body when it may be material.
5. POST-CONVICTION DNA TESTING
Sec. 6 of the DNA Evidence Rule (AM No. 06-11-
5-SC) provides for the rule on the availment of post-
conviction DNA testing
Sec. 6 POST-CONVICTION DNA TESTING
-may be available, without need of prior court order, to
the prosecution or any person convicted by final and
executory judgment provided that:
a. A biological sample exists
b. Such sample is relevant to the case; and
c. The testing would probably result in the reversal or
modification of the judgment or conviction.
6. ASSESSMENT OF PROBATIVE VALUE OF
THE DNA EVIDENCE
Sec. 7 of the DNA Evidence Rule (AM No. 06-11-
5-SC) provides for the rule on the assessment of
probative value of the DNA evidence.
Sec. 7 ASSESSMENT OF PROBATIVE VALUE OF
DNA EVIDENCE
-the court shall consider the following:
a. The chain of custody, including how the biological
samples were collected, how they were handled,
and the possibility of contamination of the
samples.
b. The DNA Testing Methodology, including the
procedure followed in analyzing the samples, the
advantages and disadvantages of the procedure,
and compliance with the scientifically valid
standards in conducting the tests;
c. The Forensic DNA Laboratory, including
accreditation by any reputable standards-setting
institution and the qualification of the analyst who
conducted the tests.
 If the laboratory is not accredited- the
relevant experience of the laboratory in
forensic casework and credibility shall be
properly established; and
d. The reliability of the testing result, as
hereinafter provided. The provisions of the Rules of
Court concerning the appreciation of evidence shall
apply suppletorily.
-Courts should consider the following:
1. How the samples were collected
2. How they were handled
3. The possibility of contamination of the samples
4. The procedure followed in analyzing the
samples
5. Whether the proper standards and procedures
were followed in conducting the tests, and
6. The qualification of the analyst who conducted
the tests.
DNA ANALYSIS BASED ON A CONTAMINATED
SPECIMEN IS NOT CONCLUSIVE
-when the specimen is already stained or contaminated
OFFER OF THE DNA RNA RESULT: COURT SHALL
ASSESS THE DNA RESULTS
-After the DNA Analysis, it shall be incumbent upon the
parties who wish to avail of the same to offer the
results in accordance with the rules of evidence.
-The RTC in evaluating the DNA results upon
presentation, shall assess the same as evidence in
keeping with Sections 7 and 8 of the Rules. (People vs
Umanito, 2007)
DATA TO BE CONSIDERED IN DETERMINING THE
PROBATIVE VALUE OF THE DNA EVIDENCE
a. How the samples were collected
b. How they were handled
c. The possibility of contamination of the samples
d. The procedure followed in analyzing the
samples
e. Whether the proper standards and procedures
were followed in conducting the tests, and
f. The qualification of the analyst who conducted
the tests.
 7. RELIABILITY OF THE DNA TESTING
METHODOLOGY
Sec. 8 of the DNA Evidence Rule (AM No. 06-11-
5-SC) provides for the rule on the reliability of the
DNA Testing Methodology.
Sec. 8 RELIABILITY OF DNA TESTING
METHODOLOGY
-In evaluating whether the DNA testing methodology is
reliable, the court shall consider the following:
a. The falsifiability of the principles or methods
used, that is whether the theory or technique can
be and has been tested
b. The subjection to peer review and publication
of the principles or methods;
c. The general acceptance of the principles or
methods by the relevant scientific community;
d. The existence and maintenance of standards
and controls to ensure the correctness of data
gathered;
e. The existence of an appropriate reference
population database; and
f. The general degree of confidence attributed to
mathematical calculations used in comparing DNA
profiles and the significance and limitation of
statistical calculations used in comparing DNA
profiles.
8. EVALUATION OF THE DNA TESTING
RESULTS
Sec. 9 of the DNA Evidence Rule (AM No. 06-11-
5-SC) provides for the rule on the evaluation of the
DNA Testing Results
Sec. 9 EVALUATION OF DNA TESTING RESULTS
-In evaluating the results of DNA Testing, the court
shall consider the following:
a. The evaluation of the weight of matching DNA
evidence or the relevance of mismatching DNA
evidence;
b. The results of the DNA testing in the light of the
totality of the other evidence presented in the
case; and
c. DNA results that exclude the putative parent from
paternity shall be conclusive proof of non-
paternity.
 If the value of the Probability of Paternity is
less than 99.9%, the results of the DNA
testing shall be considered as corroborative
evidence.
 If the value of the Probability of Paternity is
99.9% or higher, there shall be a disputable
presumption of paternity.
9. POST-CONVICTION DNA TESTING
RESULTS: REMEDY IF FAVORABLE
Sec. 10 of the DNA Evidence Rule (AM No. 06-11-
5-SC) provides for the rule on the post-conviction DNA
testing results and the remedy if favorable.
Sec. 10 POST-CONVICTION DNA TESTING,
REMEDY IF RESULTS ARE FAVORABLE TO THE
CONVICT
-The convict or the prosecution may file a petition for
writ of habeas corpus in the court of origin if the
results of the post-conviction DNA testing are favorable
to the convict.
-In case the court, after due hearing, finds the petition
to be meritorious, it shall:
a. reverse or modify the judgment of conviction
and
b. order the release of the convict, UNLESS
continued detention is justified for a lawful
cause.
-A similar petition may be filed either in the CA or the
SC, or with any member of said courts, which may:
a. conduct a hearing thereon or
b. remand the petition to the court of origin and
issue appropriate orders.
10. CONFIDENTIAL NATURE OF THE PROFILES
AND RESULTS
Sec. 11 of the DNA Evidence Rule (AM No. 06-11-
5-SC) provides for the rule on the confidentiality of the
DNA profiles, results and information.
Sec. 11 CONFIDENTIALITY
GR: DNA profiles and all results or other information
obtained from DNA testing shall be confidential.
XPN: Upon order of the court, a DNA profile and all
results or other information obtained from DNA testing
shall only be released to any of the following, under
such terms and conditions as may be set forth by the
court:
a. Person from whom the sample was taken
b. Lawyers representing parties in the case or action
where the DNA evidence is offered and presented
or sought to be offered and presented;
c. Lawyers of private complainants in a criminal
action;
d. Duly authorized law enforcement agencies; and
e. Other persons as determined by the court.
-Whoever discloses, utilizes or publishes in any form
any information concerning a DNA profile without the
proper court order shall be liable for indirect
contempt of the court wherein such DNA evidence
was offered, presented or sought to be offered and
presented.
-Where the person from whom the biological sample
was taken files a written verified request to the
court that allowed the DNA testing for the disclosure of
the DNA profile of the person and all results or other
information obtained from the DNA testing, the same
may be disclosed to the persons named in the written
verified request.
E. RULES ON AUDIO, PHOTOGRAPHIC, VIDEO AND
EPHEMERAL EVIDENCE UNDER THE ELECTRONIC
EVIDENCE RULES
1. RULES ON AUDIO, PHOTOGRAPHIC, VIDEO
AND EPHEMERAL EVIDENCE UNDER THE
ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE RULES
2. RULESON EPHEMERAL COMMUNICATION

11. PRESERVATION OF DNA EVIDENCE III. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

Sec. 12 of the DNA Evidence Rule (AM No. 06-11- A. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
5-SC) provides for the rule on the preservation of the 1. WHAT IS DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
DNA evidence. 2. WHAT IS AN ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE
3. PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION ON
Sec. 12 PRESERVATION OF DNA EVIDENCE ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE
4. BEST EVIDENCE RULE
-The trial court shall preserve the DNA evidence in its 5. ORIGINAL OF THE DOCUMENTUNDER THE
totality, including all biological samples, DNA profiles BEST EVIDENCE RULE
and results or other genetic information obtained from 6. WHEN IS A DOCUMENT ORIGINAL?
the DNA testing. 7. WHEN IS A COPY OF AN ELECTRONIC
DOCUMENT EQUIVALENT TO ORIGINAL
-For this purpose, the court may order the appropriate
government agency to preserve the DNA evidence as
IV. SECONDARY EVIDENCE
follows:
A. SECONDARY EVIDENCE
a. In criminal cases: 1. WHAT IS SECONDARY EVIDENCE
i. For not less than the period of the time 2. RULE WHEN THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT IS
that any person is under trial for an UNAVAILABLE
offense; or 3. HOW TO PROVE THE LOST OR DESTROYED
ii. In case the accused is serving sentence, WILL
until such time as the accused has served 4. RULE IN CASE THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT
his sentence; and IS IN THE ADVERSE PARTY’S CUSTODY OR
b. In all other cases, until such time as the decision in CONTROL
the case where the DNA evidence was introduced 5. RULE IN CASE THE ORIGINAL IS A PUBLIC
has become final and executory. RECORD
 The court may allow the physical 6. PARTY CALLING FOR THE DOCUMENT NOT
destruction of a biological sample before BOUND TO OFFER IT.
the expiration of the periods set forth
above, provided that: V. PAROL EVIDENCE RULE
1. A court order to that effect has been A. PAROLE EVIDENCE RULE
secured; or 1. WHAT IS PAROL EVIDENCE?
2. The person from whom the DNA 2. WHAT IS PAROL EVIDENCE RULE?
sample was obtained has consented in EXCEPTIONS
writing to the disposal of the evidence. 3. WHERE TO FILE A COMPLAINT FOR
REFORMATION OF INSTRUMENT

12. APPLICABILITY OF THE RULES TO

PENDING CASES

Sec. 13 of the DNA Evidence Rule (AM No. 06-11-

5-SC) provides for the rule on applicability of the DNA
evidence rule to pending cases.

Sec. 13 APPLICABILITY TO PENDING CASES

-Except as provided in Sections 6 and 10 hereof, this

Rule shall apply to cases pending at the time of its
effectivity.

D. RULES ON PHOTOGRAPHIC VIDEO AND OTHER

SIMILAR EVIDENCE UNDER THE RULES ON
ENVIRONMENTAL CASES