I.

PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATION:
A. Importance of the study of Evidence in Law
Enforcement:

As an element of our Criminal Justice System, it is the

duty of every law enforcement agencies to provide the
prosecution with the materials and information
(Evidence) necessary in order to support conviction.

Every person is entitled to be presumed innocent of a

crime or wrong, unless proven otherwise. This is a
prima facie presumption which must be overcome by
proof beyond reasonable doubt.
B. Connecting the chain of events through Evidence
during Trial:

Trial refers to “the examination before a competent

tribunal, according to the laws of the land, of the facts
in issue in a cause, for the purposes of determining
such issue” (U.S. v. Raymundo, 14 Phil 416).

Evidence helps in the determination of Questions of

Facts by helping the judge reconstruct the chain of
events from the conception up to the consummation of
a criminal design.
 C. Factum Probandum and Factum Probans

Factum Probandum – The ultimate facts to be proven. These are the

propositions of law.
Examples:
• murder was committed thru treachery
• robbery was made through force upon things
Factum Probans – The evidentiary Facts. These addresses questions of
fact.
Examples:
• exit wounds were in front indicating that victim was shot at the back
• destroyed locks indicative of force upon things
Thus, the outcome of every trial is determined by:
• Propositions of law, and
• Questions of fact.
 D. Proof and Evidence

Evidence – the means to arrive at a conclusion. Under the Revised

Rules of Court, evidence is defined as “the means, sanctioned by the
rules, for ascertainment in a judicial proceeding, the truth, respecting a
matter of fact”.
Proof – the result of introducing evidence. The establishment of a
requisite degree of belief in the mind of the judge as to the facts in
issue. It refers to the accumulation of evidence sufficient to persuade
the trial court.
Quantum of evidence – the totality of evidence presented for
consideration
Quantum of proof – refers to the degree of proof required in order to
arrive at a conclusion.
Burden of evidence – the duty of a party of going forward with
evidence.
Burden of proof – the duty of the affirmative to prove that which it
alleges.
Variations on degrees of proof based on type of action:

1. Criminal Action – proof beyond reasonable doubt

[that degree of proof which produces conviction in an
unprejudiced mind]
2. Civil Action – preponderance of evidence
[evidence of greater weight or more convincing than
that which is offered to refute it]
3. Administrative Action – sufficiency of evidence
[that amount of relevant evidence which a reasonable
mind might accept as adequate to justify a conclusion]
E. Exclusionary Rule. (Fruit of the poisonous tree
doctrine)

Evidence ILLEGALLY OBTAINED are inadmissible for

reasons of public policy. This is so because of the
constitutional requirement of due process. Due process
has been defined as “the law that hears before it
condemns, which proceeds upon inquiry, and renders
judgment only after fair trial”.

As a result, jurisprudence has evolved a rule that

renders inadmissible any evidence obtained in an
illegal search from being introduced in trial.
F. Principle of Chain of Custody of Evidence

If the evidence is of a type which cannot be easily

recognized or can readily be confused or tampered with, the
proponent of the object must present evidence of its chain
of custody. The proponent need not negate all possibilities
of substitution or tampering in the chain of custody, but
must show that:
The evidence is identified as the same object which was
taken from the scene;
It was not tampered with, or that any alteration can be
sufficiently explained (i.e. discoloration due to the
application of ninhydrine solution, etc.); and
The persons who have handled the evidence are known and
may be examined in court with regard to the object.
II. GENERAL PROVISIONS:
A. Concepts of evidence:

1. It is a means of ascertainment – used to arrive at a legal

conclusion
2. It is sanctioned by the rules of court – meaning, not
excluded by the rules on relevancy and admissibility
3. It is used in a judicial proceeding – there is a jural
conflict involving different rights asserted by different
parties
4. It pertains to the truth respecting a matter of fact –
evidence represents a “claim” either for the prosecution or
for the defense where issues (clashes of view) are present.
 Admissibility of Evidence:

For evidence to be admissible, it must be:

1) relevant to the issue [relevancy test], and
2) not excluded by the law or rules of court [competency test].
Note: To determine the relevancy of any item of proof, the purpose for
which it is sought to be introduced must first be known (There must be
a formal offer).
Test of relevancy of evidence:
Whether or not the factual information tendered for evaluation of the
trial court would be helpful in the determination of the factual issue
that is disputed.
When is evidence relevant?
When it has a relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in it’s:
1) existence, or
2) non-existence
In other words, evidence is relevant when it is:
1) material, and
2) has probative value
What is meant by “probative value”?

It is the tendency of the evidence to establish the

proposition that it is offered to prove.

“Collateral Matters” not admissible except when it tend

in any reasonable degree to establish probability or
improbability of the fact in issue.

Collateral matters – matters other than the fact in

issue and which are offered as a basis for inference as to
the existence or non-existence of the facts in issue.
B. Judicial Notice, basis of:

Judicial notice is based on necessity and expediency.

This is so because what is known need not be proved.

Different kinds of judicial notices:

1. mandatory
2. discretionary
3. hearing required
C. Confession and Admission, distinguished:
Confession – an acknowledgement of guilt.
Admission – an acknowledgment of facts.

Different kinds of confession/admission:

1. Judicial
2. Extrajudicial
3. Oral
4. Written
5. Voluntary
6. Forced
 Different kinds of evidence:
1. Relevant evidence – evidence having any value in reason as
tending
to prove any matter provable in an action.
2. Material evidence – evidence is material when it is directed to
prove a
fact in issue as determined by the rules of substantive law and
pleadings.
3. Competent evidence – not excluded by law.
4. Direct evidence – proves the fact in issue without aid of inference
or presumptions.
5. Circumstantial evidence - the proof of fact or facts from which,
taken either singly or collectively, the existence of a particular
fact in dispute
may be inferred as necessary or probable consequence.
6. Positive evidence – evidence which affirms a fact in issue.
7. Negative evidence - evidence which denies the existence of a fact
in issue.
8. Rebutting evidence – given to repel, counter act or disprove facts
given in evidence by the other party.
9. Primary/Best evidence – that which the law regards as affording
the greatest certainty.
10. Secondary evidence – that which indicates the existence of a
more original source of information.
 11. Expert evidence – the testimony of one possessing knowledge
not usually acquired by other persons.
12. Prima facie evidence – evidence which can stand alone to support
a conviction unless rebutted.
13. Conclusive evidence – incontrovertible evidence
14. Cumulative evidence – additional evidence of the same kind bearing
on the same point.
15. Corroborative evidence – additional evidence of a different kind
and character tending to prove the same point as that of previously
offered evidence.
16. Character evidence – evidence of a person’s moral standing or
personality traits in a community based on reputation or opinion.
17. Demeanor evidence – the behavior of a witness on the witness stand
during trial to be considered by the judge on the issue of credibility.
18. Demonstrative evidence – evidence that has tangible and
exemplifying purpose.
19. Hearsay evidence – oral testimony or documentary evidence which
does not derive its value solely from the credit to be attached to the
witness himself.
20.Testimonial evidence – oral averments given in open court by
the witness.
21. Object/Auotoptic proferrence/Real evidence – those addressed to
the senses of the court (sight, hearing, smell, touch, taste).
22. Documentary evidence – those consisting of writing or any material
of written expression offered as proof of its contents.
containing letters, words, numbers, figures, symbols or other modes
Best Evidence Rule:
When the subject of the inquiry is the contents of a
document, no evidence shall be admissible other than
the original of the document.

For exceptions, see Sec. 3, Rule 130, Revised Rules of

Court.

A document is legally considered “Original” when:

1. It is the subject of an inquiry
2. When in two or more copies executed at or about
the same time, with identical contents.
3. When an entry is repeated in ordinary course of
business, one being copied from another at or near the
time of the transaction.
Question: May a “fake” document be considered as
“original” or “authentic”?

Yes. A forged or spurious document when presented in

court for examination is considered as the original
fake/forged document. Thus, a mere photocopy of the
allegedly forged or spurious document is only
secondary to the original questioned document.
 Secondary Evidence
When the original document has been:
1. lost,
2. destroyed, or
3. cannot be produced in court.
The offeror without bad faith must:
1. prove its execution or existence, and
2. prove the cause of its unavailability.
Secondary evidence may consist of:
1. a copy,
2. recital of its contents in some authentic document, or
3. by testimony of witnesses.
When original document is in the custody of:
1. adverse party – adverse party must have reasonable notice to
produce it. After such notice and satisfactory proof of its existence, he
fails to produce it, secondary evidence may be presented.
2. public officer – contents may be proved by certified copy issued by
the public officer in custody thereof.
C.PAROL EVIDENCE RULE
When the terms of an, agreement have been reduced to
writing, it is considered as containing all the terms agreed
upon and there can be, between the parties and their
successors in interest, no evidence of such terms other
than the contents of the written agreement.
Exceptions: a party may present evidence to modify, explain or
add to the terms of the written agreement if he puts in issue in
his pleading
An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the written
agreement
failure of the written agreement to express the true intent and
agreement of the parties
validity of the written agreement; or
The existence of other terms agreed to by the parties or their
successors in interest after the execution of the written
agreement
III. TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE:

Qualifications of witnesses:
1. can perceive
2. can make known their perception to others
3. not disqualified by reason of mental incapacity,
immaturity, marriage, privileged communications, or “dead
man’s statute”.
“Res Inter Alios Acta” Rule
General Rule: The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by
an act, declaration, or omission of another.
Exception:
1. admission by a co-partner or agent
2. admission by a conspirator
3. admission by privies
4. admission by silence
In the above cases, the admission of one person is
admissible as evidence against another.
Testimonial Knowledge:
General Rule: A witness can testify only to those facts which he
knows of his personal knowledge; that is, which are derived from
his own perception. Any statement which derives its strength
from another’s personal knowledge is hearsay, and is therefore
inadmissible.
Exceptions:
1. Dying declarations (ante-mortem statements)
2. Declaration against interest
3. Act or declaration about pedigree
4. Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree
5. Common reputation
6. Part of the res gestae
7. Entries in the course of business
8. Entries in official records
9. Commercial lists and the like
10. Learned treatises
11. Testimony or deposition at a former proceeding
12. Examination of child victim/witness in cases of child abuse
 EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE
 waiver
 independently relevant evidence
 dying declaration
Declaration against interest : Declaration against interest is an
exception to the hearsay rule only applies if the declarant is deceased or
unable to testify.
 Act or declaration about pedigree
 Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree
 Common reputation

 Verbal acts
 Requisites for admissibility of hearsay evidence as to verbal acts
 statements accompanying an equivocal act
 material to the issue
 giving it a legal significance
  Part of the res gestae (thing done)

 People v. Peralta, 237 SCRA 218 (1994)
 Facts: Atanacia Ramos had a daughter Rosita. Rosita married Domiciano Peralta. They had a
daughter Siony. On morning, Siony came to Atanacia at her house frantically told her that
Domiciano was strangling Rosita. They went to the Peralta home and found Rosita dead.
Domiciano was not there. They immediately reported the matter to the police, who eventually
arrested the Domiciano. At the preliminary investigation, Siony executed a sworn statement
implicating her father. Domiciano was charged with Parricide. At the trial Atanacia testified as to
Siony’s declaration. However, Siony testified for her father and said that though she saw someone
strangling her mother, she did not see who it was. After the defense rested, the prosecution
presented the investigating judge who testified as to the regularity of the conduct of the preliminary
investigation. TC convicts.
 Held: The statement Siony made to her grandmother when she rushed to inform her of her father's
attack on her mother was part of the res gestae. Res gestae means the "thing done." It refers to those
exclamations and statements made by either the participants, victims or spectators to a crime
immediately before, during or immediately after the commission of the crime, when the
circumstances are such that the statements were made as a spontaneous reaction or utterance
inspired by the excitement of the occasion and there was no opportunity for the declarant to
deliberate and to fabricate a false statement. Siony rushed to Atanacia immediately upon seeing her
father strangling her mother to death.
 Her spontaneous declaration to Atanacia was part of the res gestae and is assumed to preclude the
probability of premeditation of fabrication. Since the utterance was made under the immediate and
uncontrolled domination of the senses rather than reason and reflection, and during the brief
period when consideration of self-interest could not have been fully brought to bear, the utterance
may be taken as expressing Siony's real belief as to the facts just observed by her.
IV. BURDEN OF PROOF AND PRESUMPTIONS:

Burden of proof – the duty of a party to present

evidence on the facts in issue necessary to establish his
claim or defense by the amount of evidence required
by law.

Presumption – an inference as to the existence of a fact

not actually known, arising from its usual connection
with another which is known or a conjecture based on
past experience as to what course human affairs
ordinarily take.
 OPINION RULE

 GR: The opinion of a witness is not admissible.
 Exceptions: Admissible opinion evidence
 a matter requiring special knowledge, skill, experience or training
which he is shown to possess, may be received in evidence.
 the identity of a person about whom he has adequate knowledge;
 a handwriting with which he has sufficient familiarity
 the mental sanity of a person with whom he is sufficiently acquainted.
 his impressions of the
 emotion
 behavior
 condition or
 appearance of a person
2 kinds of presumptions:
1. Conclusive presumptions [jure et de jure] – based
on rules of substantive law which cannot be overcome
by evidence to the contrary.
2. Disputable presumptions [prima facie
presumptions, rebuttable presumptions] – based on
procedural rules and may be overcome by evidence to
the contrary.
Kinds of Conclusive Presumptions:
1. Estoppel by record or judgment – the preclusion to deny the
truth of matters set forth in a record, whether judicial or
legislative, and also deny the facts adjudicated by a court of
competent jurisdiction (Salud v. CA, 233 SCRA 387).
2. Estoppel by deed – a bar which precludes a party to a deed
and his privies from asserting as against the other and his privies
any right or title in derogation of the deed or denying the truth
of any material fact asserted in it (Iriola v. Felices, 30 SCRA 202).
3. Estoppel in pais – based upon express representation or
statements or upon positive acts or conduct. A party cannot, in
the course of litigation or in dealings in pais, be permitted to
repudiate his representation or occupy inconsistent positions.
4. Estoppel against Tenant – the tenant is not permitted to
deny the title of his landlord at the time of the commencement
of the relation of landlord and tenant between them.
Note: For Kinds of disputable presumptions, see Sec. 3, Rule 131
of the Revised Rules of Court.
 Presentation of Evidence:
The examination of witnesses presented in a trial or hearing shall be
done is open court, and under oath or affirmation. Unless the witness is
incapacitated to speak, or the question calls for a different mode of
answer, the answer of the witness shall be given orally.
Rights and Obligations of witnesses:
1. To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or insulting questions,
and from harsh or insulting demeanor.
2. Not to be detained longer than the interest of justice requires.
3. Not to be examined except only as to matters pertinent to the
issue.
4. Not to give an answer which will tend to subject him to a penalty
for an offense unless otherwise provided by law.
5. Not to give an answer which will tend to degrade his reputation,
unless it be to the very fact at issue or to the fact from which the
fact in issue would be presumed,but a witness must answer to the facts
of his previous final conviction for an offense.
Order of Examination of individual witnesses:
Direct examination by the proponent
Cross examination by the opponent
Re-direct examination by the proponent
Re-cross examination by the opponent
Direct examination – the examination in chief of a witness by the
party presenting him on the facts relevant to the issue.
Cross examination – the examination by the adverse party of the
witness as to any matter stated in the direct examination, or
connected therewith, with sufficient fullness and freedom from
interest or bias, or the reverse, and to elicit all important facts
bearing upon the issue.
Re-direct examination – second questioning by the proponent to
explain or supplement answers given in the cross examination.
Re-cross examination – second questioning by the adverse party
on matters stated on the re-direct and also on such matters as
may be allowed by court.
 Different Types of Questions:
Leading questions –It is one where the answer is already supplied by
the examiner into the mouth of the witness. [Ex. You saw Jose killed
Juan because you were present when it happened, didn’t you?]
Misleading question – a question which cannot be answered without
making an unintended admission. [Ex. Do you still beat your wife?]
Compound question – a question which calls for a single answer to
more than one question. [Ex. Have you seen and heard him?]
Argumentative question – a type of leading question which reflects the
examiners interpretation of the facts. [Ex. Why were you driving
carelessly?]
Speculative question – a question which assumes a disputed fact not
stated by the witness as true. [Ex. The victim cried in pain, didn’t he?]
Conclusionary question – a question which asks for an opinion which
the witness is not qualified or permitted to answer. [Ex. Asking a high
school drop-out whether the gun used is a Cal. 45 pistol or 9mm pistol]
Cumulative question – a question which has already been asked and
answered.
Harassing/Embarrassing question – [Ex. Are you a homosexual?]
Classes of Documents:
Documents are either public or private.

Public documents are:

1. The written official acts, or records of the official acts of

sovereign authority, official bodies and tribunals, and
public officers, whether of the Philippines, or a foreign
country.
2. Documents acknowledged before a notary public
except last wills and testaments.
3. Public records (1) kept in the Philippines, or private
documents (2) required by law to be entered therein.

All other writings are private.

OFFER & OBJECTION

OFFER-The court shall consider no evidence which
has not been formally offered. The purpose for which
the evidence is offered must be specified.
When to make offer
testimony – the time the witness is called to testify
documentary and object – after the presentation of a
party's testimonial evidence
Offer of evidence shall be done orally unless allowed
by the court to be done in writing.

OBJECTION- When objection to evidence offered
must be made
orally – immediately after the offer is made.
in writing – within 3 days after notice of the offer,
unless a different period is allowed by the court.
a question propounded in the course of the oral
examination – as soon as the grounds therefor shall
become reasonably apparent.
The grounds for the objections should always be
specified.
Grounds for objection
Hearsay
argumentative
leading
misleading
incompetent
irrelevant
best evidence rule
parole evidence rule
question has no basis