EVIDENCE Relevant evidence

Is the means, sanctioned by these Rules, of ascertaining in a
judicial proceeding, the truth respecting a matter of fact
(Sec.1, Rule 128)
Scope and applicability
Applies in all courts and in all trials and hearings (Sec.1, Rule
128); applies only to judicial proceedings
In what cases not applicable
Election cases, land registration, cadastral, naturalization,
insolvency proceedings, and other cases (Sec.4, Rule 1)
 Administrative agencies are not bound by the rules
of evidence.
 To be relevant, the evidence must have such a
relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its
existence or non-existence. (Sec.4, Rule 128)
 Matter of inference and logic
 No precise test of relevance; the determination
rests largely at the discretion of the court, which
must be exercised according to the teachings of
logic and everyday experience
 2 aspects of relevance:
o Connectedness
o Probative value
 Evidence on the credibility of a witness or the lack
of it, is always relevant.

When evidence is required When will the court determine relevance

When the court has to resolve a question of fact  Object evidence – when presented for court’s view
 Testimonial – when the question seeking to elicit
When evidence not required inadmissible testimony is asked
 When there is no factual issue; only question of law  Documentary – when formally offered by the party
is raised before he rests his case
 When the pleadings do not tender an issue of fact
– judgment on the pleadings Collateral matters
 When presentation of evidence is dispensed with by  A matter is collateral when it is on a “parallel or
agreement of the parties diverging line,” merely additional or auxiliary; it has
 Matters of judicial notice and on judicial admissions no direct connection to the fact in issue (e.g.
 Presumptions motive, reputation)
 Gen. Rule: Evidence on collateral matters not
Application of Rules on Electronic Evidence allowed
Applies to civil actions, quasi-judicial and administrative  Exception: it may be admitted if it tends in any
actions; not to criminal cases reasonable degree to establish the probability or
improbability of the fact in issue
Distinction between evidence in civil and criminal
cases Competent evidence
Civil Case Criminal Case  One that is not excluded by the law/rules
Preponderance of evidence Proof beyond reasonable  Test: law or rules
doubt  Electronic evidence is competent and is admissible
Offer of compromise is not Offer of compromise by if it complies with the rules on admissibility under
an admission of liability, and the accused may be the Rules of Court and authenticated according to
is not admissible in received in evidence as an the Rules on Electronic Evidence.
evidence. implied admission of guilt.
No presumption of Presumption of innocence Admissibility v. probative value/weight
innocence -refers to the question of -refers to the question of
whether or not the whether or not the
Factum probandum v. Factum probans evidence is to be evidence proves an issue
-fact to be proved -fact/material evidencing considered at all -tendency to convince
the fact to be proved and persuade

Waiver of rules on evidence Multiple admissibility

 When an objectionable evidence is objected to, the
evidence becomes admissible because of waiver.
 Parties may stipulate waiver of rules of evidence as
long as it is not contrary to law, morals, public
policy, good customs.
Admissibility of evidence
Conditional admissibility
2 elements of admissibility
1. The evidence must be relevant
2. It must be competent – not excluded by the
law/rules
 Evidence may be admissible for 2 or more purposes
(ex. as dying declaration and part of res gestae)
 It may be admissible for one purpose but not for
another; admissible against one party but not
against another
 Applies when the relevance of a piece of evidence
is not apparent at the time it is offered, but the
relevance will be seen when connected to other
pieces of evidence not yet offered
 Proponent may ask the court that the evidence be
conditionally admitted in the meantime, subject to
 the condition that he is going to establish its
relevancy and competency at a later time
 If the connection is not shown, the court may, upon
motion of the adverse party, strike out from the
record the evidence that was conditionally
admitted.
Curative admissibility
 Allows a party to introduce otherwise inadmissible
evidence to answer the opposing party’s previous
introduction of inadmissible evidence if it would
remove any unfair prejudice caused by the
admission of the earlier inadmissible evidence
Direct evidence v. circumstantial evidence
-proves a fact without -indirectly proves a fact
need to make an through an inference
inference from another drawn from the evidence
fact established
Conviction by circumstantial evidence
 Even in the absence of direct evidence, conviction
can be had if the established circumstances
constitute an unbroken chain, consistent with each
other and to the hypothesis that the accused is
guilty, to the exclusion of all other hypothesis that
he is not
 Requisites:
1. There is more than one circumstances
2. The facts from which the inferences are
derived are proven
3. The combination of all circumstances is
such as to produce conviction beyond
reasonable doubt (Sec.4, Rule 133)
 As to probative value, the Court considers
circumstantial evidence of a nature identical to
direct evidence because no greater degree of
certainty is required of circumstantial evidence.
Cumulative evidence v. corroborative evidence
-evidence of the same -evidence of a different
kind and character as that kind from that previously
already given and that offered that tends to
tends to prove the same prove the same fact
fact -tends to confirm,
strengthen or validate
evidence already
presented
*not always required
Positive evidence v. negative evidence
-when a witness affirms -when the witness state
that a certain state of that an event did not
facts exist or that a occur or the state of facts
certain event happened did not exist
-given greater probative -Denial is a negative
value evidence; it cannot
overcome positive
testimony especially from
a credible witness
Competency of a witness v. credibility
-qualification of a witness -worthiness of belief
Admissible evidence v. credible evidence
-evidence of such -worthy of belief
character that the court, -admissibility does not
pursuant to the rules, is mean credibility
bound to receive it or
allow it to be introduced
in trial
Inadmissible evidence under Anti-Wiretapping Law
(R.A. 4200)
 Inadmissible evidence under the law:
1. any communication or spoken word
2. existence, contents, substance, purport,
meaning of the communication
3. any information contained, obtained or
secured by any person in violation of the
law
 Prohibited acts:
1. Secretly overhear
2. Intercept
3. Record private communication without
the authority of all the parties to such
communication
 Other prohibited acts: to possess any record,
communicate the contents, furnish transcripts
 Acts mentioned would not constitute a violation of
the law if done by a peace officer authorized by a
written order of the court in cases involving:
o Treason, espionage, provoking war and
disloyalty in case of war, piracy, mutiny in
high seas, rebellion, conspiracy and
proposal to, inciting to commit rebellion,
sedition, kidnapping
 Evidence obtained in violation of RA 4200 shall not
be admissible in evidence in the ff. proceedings: (1)
judicial (2) quasi-judicial (3) legislative (4)
administrative hearing or investigation
 Not unlawful to record open and public
communications; what is protected are private
conversations
 Note: Under the Human Security Act, a police/law
enforcement officer may listen to, intercept and
record any communication between members of
judicially declared terrorist organization or any
person charged with or suspected of terrorism,
provided there is written order by the CA.
Other notes on probative value and credibility
 For evidence to be worthy of credit, it must not only
proceed from a credible source but must be
credible in itself.
 Test: conformity with the knowledge and common
experience of mankind
 The task of weighing the credibility of testimonies
is best left to the trial judge by virtue of the first-
hand impressions he derives.
  Testimonies of child-victims are normally given full Equipoise rule or equiponderance doctrine
weight and credit since a woman, more so if minor,  where the evidence of the parties are evenly
says that she has been raped, she says in effect all balanced, or there is doubt on which side the
that is necessary to show that rape was committed. evidence preponderates, the decision should be
Youth and immaturity are badges of truth. against the party with the burden of proof (e.g. in
favour of defendant/accused)
Other doctrines  based on the principle that no one shall be deprived
 Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus – if the life, liberty or property without due process of law
testimony of a witness on a material issue is wilfully
false and given with the intention to deceive, the Presumptions
jury may disregard all the witness’ testimony
 Denial – inherently weak defense; cannot Presumption
overcome positive identification An assumption of fact resulting from a rule of law which
 Alibi – inherently weak and must be rejected when requires such fact to be assumed from another fact/s
the identity of the accused is satisfactorily and established
categorically established by an eyewitness  not evidence; merely affects the burden of offering
o For the defense of alibi to prosper: evidence
 The person must be at a
different place at the time of Effect of presumption
commission of offense One need not introduce evidence to prove the fact for
 His presence at the crime scene presumption is prima facie proof of the fact presumed.
is physically impossible.
 Frame-up – to prosper, the defense must adduce Presumption v. inference
clear and convincing evidence to overcome the -rule of law directing that -result of reasoning
presumption that government officials have if a party proves certain process; not required by
performed their duties in a regular manner facts, the judge must also law
o Inherently weak; easily fabricated accept the presumed fact -no legal effect
 Flight or non-flight as proven
o Flight is indicative of guilt -mandatory unless
rebutted
o Non-flight does not necessarily mean
innocence
Kinds of presumption
 Delay
1. presumption of law (presumption juris) –
o delayed reporting by a witness does not
assumption which the law requires
render their testimonies false or
a. conclusive presumption (presumption
incredible
juris et de jure)
o could be due to fear of reprisal
b. disputable presumption (presumption
o only when the delay is unreasonable and
juris tantum)
unexplained may it work to discredit the
2. presumption of fact (presumption hominis) – not
complainant
required by law (inference)
Burden of Proof and Burden of Evidence
Conclusive presumption (Sec.2, Rule 131)
A presumption is conclusive when it becomes irrebutable and
Burden of proof (“onus probandi”)
any evidence tending to rebut the presumption is not
Duty of a party to present evidence on facts in issue
admissible
necessary to establish his claim or defense by the amount of
1. Estoppel by conduct (estoppel in pais)
evidence required by law (Sec.1, Rule 131)
2. Landlord and tenant
o The tenant is not permitted to deny the
Who has burden of proof
title of his landlord at the time of the
He who alleges must prove what is alleged
commencement of the relation of landlord
Test: Which party to an action or suit will fail if he offers no
and tenant between them.
evidence competent to show the facts averred as the basis
o This applies even though the landlord had
for the relief he seeks to obtain
no title
*does not shift from one party to another

Estoppel
Burden of evidence
 Equitable principle which prevents persons from
Duty of a party to go forward with evidence to overthrow the
going back on their own acts and representations,
prima facie evidence against him
to the prejudice of others who relied on them
*shifts from one side to the other
 Elements (in relation to the party to be estopped)
 o Conduct amounting to false
representation or concealment of material
facts
o Knowledge of the truth
o Intent or expectation that this conduct
shall be acted upon by the other party
 Elements (in relation to the party invoking
estoppel)
o Lack of knowledge
o Reliance in good faith on the conduct of
the other party
o Action or inaction based thereon of such
character as to change the position or
status of the person claiming estoppel, to
his injury or prejudice
Disputable presumptions (Sec.3, Rule 131)
 Presumption of regularity of court proceedings
o Does not apply in a petition for writ of
amparo
 Presumption of regularity of official acts
o Does not apply during in-custodial
investigations
 Presumption of innocence prevails over the
presumption of regular performance of duty
 Presumption that evidence when wilfully
suppressed would be adverse if produced
o Does not apply if (a) evidence is at the
disposal of both parties (b) suppression is
not wilful (c) merely corroborative or
cumulative (d) suppression is an exercise
of privilege
 Notarized document enjoys presumption of
regularity; prima facie evidence of facts stated
therein
 Presumption that titles are regularly issued and
valid
 Presumption that when a mail matter is sent by
registered mail, it is received in the regular course
of mail
o Elements: (a) letter was properly
addressed with postage prepaid (b)
mailed
o Direct denial shifts the burden
 Presumption of constitutionality of every statute
 Absence of logbook not conclusive proof of non-
issuance of marriage license; presumption of
validity of marriage
 A child who is conceived or born during marriage of
his parents is legitimate.
 Existence of fraud may be presumed:
o Alienation of property by gratuitous title
by the debtor who has not reserved
sufficient property to pay his debts
contracted before such alienation
o Alienation of property by onerous title
may be a debtor against whom some
judgment has been rendered or writ of
attachment issued
 Presumption of soundness of mind
 Presumption of equitable mortgage
 Presumption that a contract is what it purports to
be
 One found in possession of and who used a forged
document is the forger
 Judgment of a foreign court or tribunal
 Presumption of negligence of common carriers
 Res ipsa loquitur
 Presumption of death
Quantum of evidence
Proof beyond reasonable doubt
 Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean
such a degree of proof as, excluding all possibility
of error, produces absolute certainty. Moral
certainty only is required, or that degree of proof
which produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind
(Sec.2, Rule 133)
 For criminal cases; burden of proof is on the
prosecution
 Reasonable doubt is that state of the case which,
after comparison of all the evidence, does not lead
the judge to have in his mind, a moral certainty of
the truth of the charge. Where there is reasonable
doubt, there must be acquittal.
Preponderance of evidence
 In civil cases, the party having the burden of proof
must establish his case by preponderance of
evidence. (Sec.1, Rule 133)
 Means that the evidence adduced by one side is, as
a whole, superior to or has greater weight than that
of the other.
 In determining whether or not there is
preponderance of evidence, court consider:
o All the facts and circumstances of the
case
o Witness’ manner of testifying,
intelligence, means and opportunity of
knowing the facts to which they are
testifying, nature of the facts to which
they testify, probability or improbability of
their testimony
o Witnesses’ interest or want of interest,
personal credibility
o Number of witness
Substantial evidence
 A fact is deemed established if it is supported by
substantial evidence, or that amount of relevant
evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as
adequate to justify a conclusion (Sec.5, Rule 133)
 Applies to administrative and quasi-judicial
proceedings
 Applicable in petition for writ of amparo
Clear and convincing evidence
 Evidence is clear and convincing if it produces in
the mind of the trier of the fact a firm belief or
 conviction as to allegations sought to be
established
 More than preponderance but less than proof
beyond reasonable doubt
 Applications:
o To overcome presumption of regularity
o Bad faith
o Fraud
o Forgery
o That a judge is biased or partial
o Defense of justifying circumstances
o Frame-up and extortion
o Alibi
Evidentiary weight of electronic evidence
Certain factors to be considered:
1. Reliability of the manner in which it was generated,
stored or communicated
2. Reliability of the manner in which its originator was
identified
3. Integrity of the information and communication
system
4. Familiarity of the witness or the person who made
the entry with the communications and information
system
5. Nature and quality of the information
6. Other factors
Admissibility and evidentiary weight of an electronic
document may be established by an affidavit stating facts of
personal knowledge of the affiant or based on authentic
records.
Judicial notice
Judicial notice
Dispenses with introduction of evidence on certain matters
When judicial notice is mandatory
No motion or hearing is necessary
1. Existence and territorial extent of states
2. Political history, forms of government and symbols
of nationality of states
3. Law of nations
4. Admiralty and maritime courts of the world and
their seals
5. Political constitution and history of the Philippines
6. Official acts of the legislative, executive, and
judicial departments of the Philippines
7. Laws of nature
8. Measure of time
9. Geographical divisions (Sec.1, Rule 129)
When judicial notice is discretionary
Applies to:
1. Matters of public knowledge
2. Capable of unquestionable demonstration
3. Ought to be known to judges because of their
judicial functions (Sec.2, Rule 129)
Test: notoriety
Any doubt must be resolved against taking of judicial notice.
Judicial notice and knowledge of the judge
 Judicial knowledge ≠ judicial notice
 Mere personal knowledge of a judge is not judicial
knowledge of the court. He is not authorized to
make his individual knowledge of a fact, not
generally known, as the basis of his action.
 A judge must take judicial notice of a fact if it is one
which is the proper subject of judicial notice even if
not within his personal knowledge.
 A judge may not take judicial notice of a fact which
he personally knows if it is not part of the evidence
or not generally known within its territorial
jurisdiction.
Stage when judicial notice may be taken
 During trial OR after trial: before judgment or on
appeal (Sec.3, Rule 129)
o Court may announce its intention to take
judicial notice of a matter, motu proprio
or on request of a party
o And allow the parties to be heard
 Hearing is only for the purpose of determining the
propriety of taking judicial notice of a certain
matter, and not for the purpose of proving issues
in the case
Doctrines on judicial notice
 Our courts cannot take judicial notice of foreign
laws. They must be pleaded and proved.
Otherwise, doctrine of processual presumption
applies (presumed to be same as Ph laws)
-Exceptions:
o When the law is generally well known as
when it had been ruled upon in previous
cases
o When the foreign law is part of a
published treatise, periodical or
pamphlet, and the writer is recognized as
expert in the subject
 Judicial notice of municipal ordinances
o MTC – should take judicial notice
o RTC – should
 If required by law OR
 Upon appeal of cases from MTC
which took judicial notice of
municipal ordinance
o CA – may
 A court will take judicial notice of its own acts or
records in the same case
 Court are not authorized to take judicial notice of
records of other cases.
-Exceptions
o In the absence of objection, with
knowledge of other party, the contents of
the other case are clearly referred to by
title and number in a pending action and
adopted into the record of the latter
o When the original record of the other case
is actually withdrawn from the archives at
 the court’s discretion upon request, or
with consent of parties, and admitted as
part of the record of pending case
 Not proper subjects of judicial notice
o proprietary acts of GOCCs
o post office practices
o admin regulation or law not yet effective
o age of victim
o new address of counsel of record
 proper subjects of judicial notice
o banking practice of investigating the
borrower
o financial condition of the government
o general increase in rentals of real estate
o matters within the locality where the
court sits (e.g. congressman)
Judicial admissions
Judicial admissions
Admission, verbal or written, made by a party in the course
of the proceedings in the same case (Sec.4, Rule 129)
Does not require proof
Elements
1. made by a party to the case
2. made in the course of the proceedings in the same
case
3. does not require a particular form; verbal or written
Examples
 made in pleadings
o actual admissions
o matters not specifically denied in answer
o genuineness and due execution of
actionable document not denied
 during trial, by verbal or written manifestations or
stipulations
 stipulation of facts during pre-trial
 those made during depositions, interrogatories,
requests for admission
Admission of accused in criminal cases
 Admission made by the accused in the pre-trial of
criminal case is not necessarily admissible against
him.
o Conditions: (1) reduced in writing (2)
signed by accused and counsel
 Admissions in open court are automatically reduced
in writing and contained in official transcript of
proceedings. Signature not necessary because
counsel has authority to make relevant admissions.
Admission in amended pleadings
 Amended pleading supersedes the pleading it
amends.
 Pleadings that have been amended disappear from
the record, lose their status as pleadings, and cease
to be judicial admissions.
Admission by counsel
 Admissions by counsel are generally conclusive
upon a client.
 Exceptions: (1) where reckless or gross negligence
of counsel deprives the client of due process of law
(2) when its application will result in outright
deprivation of client’s liberty or property (3) when
interests of justice so requires
Effect of judicial admissions
 Requires no proof
 Bind the person who makes the same; Cannot be
contradicted by the admitter
How contradicated
1. By showing that the admission was made through
palpable mistake
2. By showing that no such admission
Object evidence
Object evidence
 Real evidence; very thing involved in the case
 Addressed to the senses of the court (Sec.1, Rule
130)
 Ranks high in our hierarchy of evidence; prevails
over testimonial evidence
Requisites for admissibility
1. Relevant
2. Authenticated
 It must be shown that the thing is what it
is claimed to be
3. Authenticated by a competent witness
 Must have the capacity (personal
knowledge) to identify the object as the
thing involved in the case
4. Formally offered in evidence
Demonstrative evidence
Not the actual thing; only represents or demonstrates the
real thing
1. Photographs
Admissibility under Electronic Rules of Evidence:
a. It shall be presented, displayed or shown
to the court
b. Identified, explained or authenticated by
either (i) person who made the recording
or (ii) some other person competent to
testify
2. Motion pictures and recordings
For tape recordings
a. Witness should identify speakers
b. How he recognize their voice
c. Not in violation of Anti Wiretapping Law
3. Diagrams, models and maps
4. X-ray pictures
5. Scientific tests, demonstrations, experiments
View of object or scene
 When an object is relevant to the fact in issue, it
may be exhibited, examined or viewed by the court.
 Court may make an ocular inspection – “view”
Categories of object evidence
1. Objects that have readily identifiable marks (unique
objects)
2. Objects that are made readily identifiable (objects
made unique)
3. Objects without identifying marks and cannot be
marked (non-unique objects)
 If the object has a unique characteristic (e.g. serial
number of a calibre .45 pistol), it is readily identifiable.
1. So long as the witness testifies that the object
has unique characteristics, he saw the object,
remembers its characteristics, asserts that the
object shown in court is the same object he
saw, the authentication requirement is
satisfied
 If the object does not have a unique characteristic (e.g.
typical kitchen knife), the witness may be able to identify
the same in court if he claims that he made the thing
acquire a unique characteristic like placing identifying
marks on it. He has to testify as to what he did to make
the object identifiable and that the object shown in court
has the characteristics he made on the object.
Chain of custody, in general
 For objects that are not readily identifiable or cannot be
made identifiable (e.g. drops of blood, drugs, fiber), the
proponent of the evidence must establish a chain of
custody.
 Purpose: to guaranty the integrity of the physical
evidence and prevent the introduction of evidence that
is not authentic
 The links to the chain are the people who actually
handled or had custody of the object. Each of the links
in the chain must show how he received the object, how
he handled it to prevent substitution, and how it was
transferred to another.
 Note: this is the ideal way, but not absolutely required.
As long as one of them testifies, and that the integrity
of evidence is preserved, his testimony alone is
adequate.
Chain of custody in drug cases
 Chain of custody means the duly recorded authorized
movements and custody of seized drugs or controlled
chemicals or plant sources of dangerous drugs or
laboratory equipment at each stage, from the time of
seizure/confiscation up to presentation in court.
 For authentication, the rule requires testimony about
every link in the chain from the moment the item was
picked up to the time it is offered into evidence.
 Procedure:
1. Apprehending team shall immediately after
seizure, physically inventory and photograph
the same in presence of accused, DOJ
representative and elected public official.
2. Within 24 hrs, submit to PDEA Forensic Lab.
3. Within 24 hrs after receipt, the examiner must
issue a certification of the examination results
under oath.
4. After filing of criminal case, the court shall
within 72 hours, conduct an ocular inspection
of the drugs and through the PDEA proceed
with the destruction within 24 hrs.
5. Dangerous Drugs Board shall issue
certification of the destruction. Certification
and representative samples submitted to
court.
 Non-compliance with the procedure will not invalidate
the seizure and custody provided:
1. Non-compliance must be based on justifiable
grounds
2. The officer/team must have properly
preserved the integrity and evidentiary value
of the item
DNA Evidence
 SC has recognized that DNA testing is a valid means of
determining paternity.
 Guidelines in assessing probative value of DNA
evidence
a. How the samples were collected
b. How they were handled
c. Possibility of contamination
d. Procedure followed in analysing the samples
e. Whether the proper standards and procedures
were followed in conducting tests
f. Qualification of the analyst who conducted the
test
Rule on DNA Evidence (A.M. 06-11-05-SC)
When the rule on DNA evidence applies
 Whenever DNA evidence is offered, used or proposed to
be offered or used as evidence in criminal or civil actions
or special proceedings
DNA – deoxyribonucleic acid; the chain of molecules found in
every nucleated cell of the body
DNA profile –genetic information derived from DNA testing of
biological samples obtained from a person where such
sample is clearly identifiable as originating from such person
DNA evidence – the totality of the DNA profiles, results and
other genetic information
Significance of DNA
 An individual’s DNA is unique, except for identical twins.
How may an order for DNA testing be obtained?
 A person who has a legal interest in the litigation may
file an application for DNA testing order before the
appropriate court at any time.
 There must be further showing that:
a. A biological sample exists that has relevance
to the case
b. The biological sample (i) was not previously
subjected to DNA testing or (ii) if previously
subjected, the results require confirmation for
good reasons
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 case
e. Other facts
 The court will issue an order to (a) take biological
samples from a person or crime scene (b) impose
reasonable conditions on the testing to protect the
integrity of the sample and the results

 Court may motu proprio order a DNA testing

 Court order is not required when the DNA testing is done
before a suit or proceeding is commenced.
 Order granting the DNA testing not appealable and
immediately executory.
o Remedy: Rule 65 petition for certioriari

No automatic admission of DNA evidence

 The grant of DNA testing shall not be construed as an
automatic admission into evidence of any DNA evidence.
 Factors considered in assessment of probative
value of DNA evidence:
a. Chain of custody
b. DNA testing methodology
c. Forensic DNA laboratory, accreditation and
qualification of the analyst
d. Reliability of the testing result

Post-conviction DNA testing

 DNA testing after conviction may be available to the
prosecution or the person convicted provided:
a. A biological sample exists
b. Such sample is relevant to the case
c. The testing would probably result in the
reversal or modification of the judgment of
conviction
 Available without need of court order

Remedy in case of favourable results of post DNA testing

 Petition for writ of habeas corpus

Confidentiality of DNA profiles

 DNA profiles are not open to public.
 Exception: they may be released to the ff:
a. Person from whom the sample was taken
b. Lawyers representing the parties to the case
c. Lawyers of private complainants in crim case
d. Duly authorized law enforcement agencies
e. Other persons determined by the cour

Paraffin Tests
 Inconclusive and unreliable
 They can only establish the presence or absence of
nitrates on the hand, but the tests alone cannot
determine whether the source was the discharge of
firearm

Polygraph tests
 Based on the principle that stress causes physiological
changes in the body which can be measured to indicate
whether the subject is telling the truth
 Not yet accepted as reliable and accurate