EVIDENCE 1st semester AY 2011-2012 Rule 128 General Concepts and Relevance

Rule 128, Section 1. Evidence defined Evidence is the means, sanctioned by these rules, of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the truth respecting a matter of fact. Evidence as the MEANS It is the means of achieving procedural or substantive due process. Evidence v. Proof Evidence Mode and manner of proving competent facts in judicial proceedings Proof the result or effect of evidence. When the requisite quantum of evidence of a particular fact has been duly admitted and given weight, the result is the proof of such fact.

Factum Probandum v. Factum Probans Factum Probandum Factum Probans ultimate fact evidentiary fact Fact sought to be Fact by which the factum established probandum is to be established proposition Materials which establish the proposition May be intermediate + / - , depending on the factum probandum Question of fact v. Question of law Question of fact Question of law Need to prove proposition No need to prove because (factum probandum and 120.2 requires that judges factum probans) for a party know the law, which they to win must apply in determining the controversy When Evidence is not necessary? 1. Judicial notice 2. Judicial admission 3. Conclusive presumption 4. Res ipsa loquitur o has to do with factum probandum of negligence only Rule 128, Section 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. Applicability of the Rules of Evidence o Rules of Evidence are primarily applicable to judicial proceedings (i.e. civil, criminal and special). o Rules of Evidence are applicable to quasi-judicial proceedings (administrative agencies) in the following manner: By analogy In suppletory character Whenever practicable and convenient

Classifications of Evidence 1. According to form Object (real) o Directly addressed to the senses of the court (i.e. magistrate or his authorized delegate) o Consists of tangible things exhibited or demonstrated in open court o in open court o in ocular inspections o at a place designated by the court o evidence by autoptic reference Documentary o evidence supplied by written instruments or derived from conventional symbols o e.g. letters, by which ideas are represented on material Testimonial o submitted to the court through the testimony or deposition of a witness 2. Relevant, Material, and Competent Relevant o Having any value in reason as tending to prove any matter provable in an action o Can be used to prove even factum probans o Test: logical relation of the evidentiary facts to the fact in issue o WON the evidentiary fact tends to establish the probability or improbability of the fact in issue Material o Directed to prove a fact in issue as determined by the rules of substantive law and pleadings o Test: WON the fact it intends to prove is in issue or not o Only to prove the factum probandum Competent o Not excluded by the Rules of Court, a statute, or the Constitution o o Admissibility = relevance + competence Relevance may be relevant but immaterial e.g. in a case for collection of money, the existence of the loan is relevant but immaterial because existence of loan by itself does not necessarily mean that plaintiff can collect

3. Direct and Circumstantial Direct o Proves the fact in issue without the aid of inference or presumption o Must be directly related to factum probandum or factum probans Circumstantial o Proof of fact or facts from which, taken singly or collectively, the existence of a particular fact in dispute may be inferred as a necessary or probable consequence

EVIDENCE 1st semester AY 2011-2012 Rule 128 General Concepts and Relevance

4. Cumulative and Corroborative Cumulative o Evidence of the same form (i.e. documentary, object, or testimonial) and to the same state of facts Corroborative o Additional evidence of a difference character or form to prove the same point 5. Prima facie and Conclusive Prima Facie o Evidence which, standing alone, unexplained or uncontradicted, is sufficient to maintain the proposition affirmed o Has some relation to disputable presumptions (not evidence), which suffices for the proof of a particular fact, until uncontradicted and overcome by other evidence Conclusive o Evidence which the law does not allow to be contradicted o i.e. estoppel by deed and estoppels against tenant o proof without introduction of evidence 6. Primary and Secondary Primary o best evidence o Evidence which the law regards as affording the greatest certainty of the fact in question Secondary o substitutionary evidence o Evidence which is inferior to the primary evidence o Permitted by law only when the best evidence is not available 7. Positive and Negative Positive o When the witness affirms that a fact did or did not occur o Entitled to greater weight since the witness represents of his personal knowledge the presence or absence of fact o e.g. when a witness declares of his own knowledge that a fact did not occur why? It is an affirmation of the truth of a negative fact Negative o when the witness states he did not see or know of the occurrence of a fact 1987 Constitution Article III Bill of Rights Section 2. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and no search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge after

examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized. Section 3. (1) The privacy of communication and correspondence shall be inviolable except upon lawful order of the court, or when public safety or order requires otherwise, as prescribed by law. (2) Any evidence obtained in violation of this or the preceding section shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding. Section 12. (1) Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have the right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to have competent and independent counsel preferably of his own choice. If the person cannot afford the services of counsel, he must be provided with one. These rights cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence of counsel. (2) No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any other means which vitiate the free will shall be used against him. Secret detention places, solitary, incommunicado, or other similar forms of detention are prohibited. (3) Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this or Section 17 hereof shall be inadmissible in evidence against him. (4) The law shall provide for penal and civil sanctions for violations of this section as well as compensation to the rehabilitation of victims of torture or similar practices, and their families. Section 17. No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself. Rule 128, Section 3. Admissibility of evidence. Evidence is admissible when it is relevant to the issue and is not excluded by the law or these rules. Requisites for admissibility of evidence: 1. relevant o relevant to the issue sought to be proved o it has such a relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its existence or nonexistence 2. competent o not excluded by the law or Rules o determined by the prevailing exclusionary rules of evidence 2 axioms of admissibility of evidence (Wigmore): 1. none but facts having rational probative value are admissible (relevant)

EVIDENCE 1st semester AY 2011-2012 Rule 128 General Concepts and Relevance

2.

all facts giving rational probative value are admissible unless some specific rule forbids their admission (competent) o

When is admissibility determined? o Determined at the time the evidence is offered to the court Object when it is presented for its view or evaluation or when the party rests his case and the real evidence consists of objects exhibited in court (e.g. ocular inspections or demonstrations) Testimonial offered when a person is called to the witness stand Documentary offered immediately before a party rests his case (i.e. formal offering of evidence); after-testi evidence When Objections should be made? o At the time the evidence is offered, or o As soon as thereafter as the objection to its admissibility shall have become apparent o Otherwise, the object shall be considered waived Doctrines of Rules of Admissibility Conditional o The evidence at the time of its offer appears to be immaterial or irrelevant unless it is connected with other facts to be subsequently proved o Such evidence may be received on the condition that the other facts will be proved thereafter o Otherwise, the evidence already given will be stricken out o Applied in civil and criminal cases qualification: there should be no bad faith on the part of the proponent o Necessary to avoid unfair surprises Multiple o Evidence is relevant and competent for two or more purposes o Evidence should be admitted for any or all purposes for which it is offered, provided it satisfies all the requirements of law for its admissibility Curative o Right of a party to introduce incompetent evidence in his behalf where the court has admitted the same kinds of evidence adduced by the adverse party o American Rule: admission of incompetent evidence, without objection by the opponent, does not justify such opponent in rebutting it by similar incompetent evidence o English Rule: if a party has presented inadmissible evidence, the adverse party may resort to similar inadmissible evidence o Massachusetts Rule: adverse party

may be permitted to introduce similar incompetent evidence in order to avoid a plain and unfair prejudice caused by the admission of the other partys evidence How to determine WON the rule of curative admissibility should be applied? 1. WON it was seasonably objected to 2. Regardless of the objections, WON the admission of such evidence will cause a plain and unfair prejudice to the party against whom it was admitted Lack of objection constitutes waiver; however, the opposing party still has the right to object to similar rebutting evidence If with objection, the opposing party may contradict the incompetent evidence by presenting similar incompetent evidence Stonehill v. Diokno: evidence illegally obtained is inadmissible on a timely motion to suppress such evidence

Rule 128, Section 4. Relevancy; collateral matters. Evidence must have such a relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its existence or non-existence. Evidence on collateral matters shall not be allowed, except when it tends in any reasonable degree to establish the probability or improbability of the fact in issue. *** paragraph 1 refers to relevant evidence *** paragraph 2 refers to relevant collateral matters What is relevant evidence? Any class of evidence which has rational probative value to establish the issue in controversy How is Relevancy determined? It is determinable by the rules of logic and human experience. VAA: Evidence is common sense. What are collateral matters? Matters other than the fact in issue offered as basis for inference as to the existence or non-existence of the facts in issue When are collateral matters admissible? o Irrelevant collateral matters are prohibited o When they are relevant to fact in issue because they tend in any reasonable degree to establish the probability or improbability of the fact in issue o Relevant collateral matters are also called circumstantial evidence

EVIDENCE 1st semester AY 2011-2012 Rule 128 General Concepts and Relevance

Admissibility v. Weight Admissibility Determined by relevance and competence o o

Ilisan v. People Weight Determined by judicial evaluation in accordance with Rule 133 Relevance, illustrated, unreliability of parraffin tests Scientific experts concur in the view that the paraffin test has proved extremely unreliable. It can only establish the presence or absence of nitrates or nitrites on the hand; still, the test alone cannot determine whether the source of the nitrates or nitrites was the discharge of a firearm. The presence of nitrates should be taken only as an indication of a possibility or even of a probability but not of infallibility that a person has fired a gun. Conversely, the absence of gunpowder nitrates on petitioners hands, the day after the incident, does not conclusively establish that he did not fire a gun; neither are the negative results yielded by the paraffin test an insurmountable proof of his innocence. Credibility of witness, relations with victim The fact that Gabriel Gaton is the victims brother does not impair his credibility as a witness. Relationship by itself does not give rise to a presumption of bias or ulterior motive, nor does it ipso facto diminish the credibility or tarnish the testimony of a witness. On the contrary, a witness relationship to a victim of a crime would even make his or her testimony more credible as it would be unnatural for a relative who is interested in vindicating the crime to accuse somebody other than the culprit. The natural interest of witnesses, who are relatives of the victim, in securing the conviction of the guilty would actually deter them from implicating persons other than the true culprits.

It is possible that evidence is admissible but given very little weight e.g. hearsay which was not objected to Conversely, there may be evidence which have evidentiary weight but are inadmissible because they are excluded the rules of evidence

Nuez v. Cruz-Apao: Text messages were properly admitted in evidence pursuant to Sec. 1 (k), Rule 2 of the Rules of Electronic Evidence ephemeral electronic communication refers to telephone conversations, text messages, and other electronic forms of communication the evidence of which is not recorded or retained MCC Industrial Sales Corp v. Ssangyong Corp: The photocopies of transmissions are not within the coverage of RA 8792. Facsimile transmissions are not paperless Office of the Court Administrator v. Lerma Relevance, defined Evidence must have such a relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its existence or nonexistence. Relevancy is, therefore, determinable by the rules of logic and human experience. Relevant evidence is any class of evidence which has rational probative value to the issue in controversy." Relevance illustrated The issue therefore boils down to whether or not the condominium units exist, and the incontrovertible proof of this are the condominium units themselves. The logical thing to do would have been to order the conduct of an ocular inspection. Instead of an ocular inspection, respondent relied on the certificate of registration, the development permit, the license to sell, the building permit, and the Condominium Certificate of Title on the basis of which the judge ordered the dismissal of the case. Logic and human experience teach us that the documents relied upon by respondent do not constitute the best evidence to prove the existence or nonexistence of the condominium units. Relevance, illustrated The testimony of Aquino, along with the certification issued by Hermogena (all to the effect that Judge Lerma played golf in various dates) are relevant considering that he did not file any leave of absence on the dates in which the witnesses testified that he played golf. These indubitably established that respondent judge violated Supreme Court Memorandum Order dated November 19, 1973, Administrative Circular No. 3-99 dated January 15, 1999, and Administrative Circular No. 5 dated October 4, 1988.