Download Evidence in Philippine Law: A Comprehensive Guide to Rules and Concepts and more Study notes Law of Evidence in PDF only on Docsity!
CRIMINAL EVIDENCE
WHAT IS EVIDENCE?
Evidence is the means, sanctioned by the Revised Rules of Court, of ascertaining to a judicial proceeding the truth respecting a matter of fact (Sec. 1, Rule 128) DEFINE THE FOLLOWING TERM: Rule of Evidence - Material Evidence - Relevant Evidence - Competent Evidence - Direct and circumstantial evidence - Primary or best or secondary evidence - Positive and negative evidence - Export evidence - Cumulative evidence - Corroborative evidence - Rebutting evidence - Prima facie evidence - Conclusive evidence - Real evidence - Testimonial evidence Rule of Evidence – expresses the mode of manner of proving the facts and circumstances upon which the party relies to establish the fact in dispute (Ruporto Martin, Rules of Court in the Philippines. Vol. V. citing 20 Am. Jur. 34, p. 1) Material evidence – tends to prove the fact in issue as that issue is determined by the rules of substantive law and pleadings (Jaime R. Nuevas, Remedial Law Reviewer, 1971 Ed., citing Wigmore, Student’s Ed., p. 530)
Relevant evidence – evidence is relevant when it has a tendency in reason to establish the probability or improbability if a fact in issue. (Vicente Francisco, The Revised Rules of Court in the Philippines, 1990 Ed., citing 1 Elliot on Evidence, p. 5) Competent evidence – not excluded by law in a particular case (Bautista vs. Aparece, (CA ), 51 O.G. 805 ) Direct and circumstantial evidence – direct evidence proves the fact in dispute without the aid of any inference or presumption., while circumstantial evidence is the proof of a fact or facts from which, taken either singly or collectively, the existence of the particular fact in dispute may be inferred as a necessary or probable consequence (5 Moran, Remedial Law Review, p. 2) Primary or best and secondary evidence – primary or best evidence is that which the law regards as affording the greatest certainty of the fact in question, while secondary evidence is that which is inferior to the primary evidence and is permitted by the law only when the best evidence is not available ( 5 Moran, op. cit., p. 3 ) Positive and negative evidence – evidence is positive when the witness affirms that a fact did or did not occur, and negative when the witness states he did not see or know of the occurrence of a fact (People vs. Ramos, L-30420, Sept. 22, 1971) Expert evidence – given by one possessing in regard to a particular subject or department of human activity knowledge does not usually acquired by other persons (U.S. vs. Gil, 13 Phil. 530) Cumulative evidence – evidence of the same kind and character as that already given, and tends to prove the same proposition (Francisco, Ibid., citing Gardner vs. Gardner, 2 Gray (Mass. 434), p. 5) Corroborative evidence – additional evidence of different kind and character, tending to prove the same [point (Francisco, supra, citing Wyne vs. Newman, 75, Va., 811, 817, p. 4) Rebutting evidence – evidence given to repel, counteract or disprove facts proved by the other side ( Nuevas, citing State vs. Silva, 21 Ida. 247, p. 531 )
Rules of Courts in the Philippines, Vol. V, 1978 Ed., pp. 1 - 2) WHAT IS THE OBJECT OF THE LAW OF EVIDENCE? The object of the law of evidence is to have a specific inquiry of the truth to establish the truth by the use of the perceptive and reasoning faculties (Martin, supra., p. 2) DISTINGUISH FACTUM PROBANDUM FROM FACTUM PROBANS Factum probandum is the ultimate fact or the fact to be established; factum probans is the evidentiary fact, or the fact by which the factum probandum is to be established ( Nuevas, citing Wigmore 5-9, p. 531-532 ) ARE THE RULES OF EVIDENCE THE SAME, IN CRIMINAL AS WELL AS IN CIVIL CASES? Yes, 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 (Sec. 2, Rule 128) WHEN IS EVIDENCE ADMISSIBLE? Evidence is admissible when it is relevant to the issue and is not excluded by the law or these rules (Sec. 3, Rule 128) WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES OF ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE? In order that the evidence may be admissible, two requisites must concur, namely: that is relevant to the issue; and that is competent. That is, that it does not belong to the class of evidence which is excluded by the law or Rules of Evidence ( Vicente Francisco, The Revised Rules of Court in the Philippines, Vol. VII, 1990 Ed., p. 19 )
WHEN IS EVIDENCE RELEVANT?
Evidence to be relevant must throw light upon, or have logical relation to the facts in issues to be established by one party or disproved by the other ( Ruperto G. Martin, Rules of Court in the Philippines, Vol. V., 1987 ed., citing 20 Am. Jur. 240, p. 9 ) WHEN IS EVIDENCE COMPETENT? Evidence is competent when it is not excluded by any of the rules of evidence such as when it is hearsay or because it is not best evidence which is within the power of a party to produce. Evidence must not only be logically relevant, but must be of such character as to be receivable in courts of justice ( Ruperto G. Martin, Ibid., citing Gilbert Law Summaries on Evidence, p. 3 ) IS EVIDENCE ILLEGALLY OBTAINED ADMISSIBLE? WHY? Evidence illegally obtains is admissible, the reason being that exclusion of such kind of evidence is the only practical way of enforcing the constitutional right against unreasonable search and seizure ( Stonehill vs. Diokno, L-19550, June 19, 1967 ) WHAT ARE THE TWO AXIOMS OF ADMISSIBILITY WHICH UNDERLIE THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE OF THE LAW OF EVIDENCE? The following: none but facts having rational probative value are admissible, which is the axiom on relevancy; and all facts having rational probative value are admissible, unless some specific rule forbids, which is the axiom on competency ( Nuevas, citing 1 Wigmore 289 - 95, p. 532 ) WHAT ARE THE THREE KINDS OR CLASSES OF ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE? They are:
The purpose of the rule on relevancy is to restrict the field of inquiry to its proper scope and to prevent the issues of becoming beclouded. It also aims to prevent surprise on the litigant, or the subjection to the party to the necessity of meeting the evidence that is possibly prejudicial and of which he has no means of anticipating (Martin, p. 15 citing 2 Jones on Evidence, 2 nd^ Ed., 1086, 1087) WHAT ARE COLLATERAL MATTERS? Collateral matters are those other than the facts in issue and which are offered as a basis for inference as to existence of the facts in issue (Sec. 4, Rule 129) WHEN MAY THE COURT ALLOW EVIDENCE ON COLLATERAL MATTERS? 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 (Sec. 4, Rule 128 ) GIVE THE CONCEPT OF (1) PROSPECTANT COLLATERAL MATTERS; (2) CONCOMITANT COLLATERAL MATTERS; (3) RETROSPECTANT COLLATERAL MATTERS Prospectant collateral matters are those preceding of the fact in issue but pointing forward to it, like moral character, motive; conspiracy, etc. Concomitant collateral matters are matters are those accompanying the fact in issue and pointing to it, like alibi, or opportunity and incompatibility; Retrospectant collateral matters are those succeeding the fact in issue but pointing forward to it, like flight and concealment, behavior of the accused upon being arrested; finger prints or foot prints; articles left at the scene of the crime which may identify the culprit ( Judge Ed Vincent S. Albano, Remedial Law Reviewer 1 st^ Ed. 1995, Rex Book Store, p. 888 citing 1 Wigmore 442 - 43 ) WHAT IS THE BASIS OF THE RULES OF EVIDENCE? The basis upon which all rules of evidence must rest, if they are to rest upon reason, is their adaptation to the successful development of the truth; and the rule of evidence at one time though necessary to the ascertainment of truth should yield to the experience has clearly demonstrate the fallacy or unwisdom of the old rule (Nuevas Remedial Law Reviewer, 1971 Ed., A & J Publishing, p. 534 citing Funk vs. U.S., 290 U.S. 391)
DEFINE JUDICIAL NOTICE
Judicial notice is the cognizance of certain facts which judges may properly take and act on without proof because they already know them. It means no more than that the court will bring to its aid and consider, without proof of the facts, its knowledge of those matter of public concern which are known by all well-informed persons ( Martin, Revised Rules of Evidence, 1985 Ed., Premium Book Store, p. 3 citing C.J.S. 509 ) WHAT IS THE FUNCTION OF JUDICIAL NOTICE? It displaces evidence since, as it stands for proof, it fulfills the object which evidence is designed to fulfill and make evidence unnecessary. (Nuevas, Ibid., p. 535 citing State vs. Main, 69 Conn 123) STATE THE PRINCIPLE ON WHICH JUDICIAL NOTICE IS BASED? The doctrine of judicial notice is based upon obvious reasons of convenience and expediency and operated to have trouble, expense and time which would be lost in establishing, in the ordinary way, facts which do not admit of contradiction (Nuevas, Ibid., p. 535 citing 20 Am., Jur. 47; Tracy’s Handbook, 62 ed., p. 44) WHEN IS JUDICIAL NOTICE MANDATORY? A court shall take judicial notice without the introduction of evidence, of the existence and territorial extent of states, their political history, forms of government and symbols of nationality, the law of nations, the admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their seals, the political constitution and history of the Philippines, the official acts of legislative, executive and judicial departments of the Philippines, the laws of nature, the measure of time and the geographical divisions ( Sec. 1, Rule 129, Revised Rules on Evidence )
Through admission may be contradicted only by showing that it was made through palpable mistake or that no such admission was made ( Sec. 4, Rule 129 ) WHAT ARE THE OBJECTS AS EVIDENCE? Objects as evidenced are those addressed to the senses of the court. When an object is relevant to the fact in issue, it mat be exhibited to, examined or viewed by the court ( Sec. 1, Rule 130 ) WHAT IS THE PRO BATIVE VALUE OF OBJECT AS EVIDENCE? Proof which is addressed directly to the senses of the court is a most convincing and satisfactory class of proof (Martin, p. 57 citing 20 Am. Jur.) object evidence is usually the most trustworthy type of evidence (Martin, citing Gilbert Law Summaries on Evidence, p. 1) WHAT ARE THE LIMITATIONS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF OBJECT EVIDENCE? The following: the evidence must e relevant; ( Sec. 1, Rule 130 ) indecent or improper objects should be excluded, unless the same is necessary for ascertaining the truth; ( Brown vs. Swineford, 28 Am. Rep. 582 ) repulsive objects should also be excluded if not absolutely necessary for the administration of justice (Knowless vs. Crampton, 55 Conn. 366 ) WHAT IS THE SCOPE OB OBJECT OF EVIDENCE?
It is the best and the highest form of proof (Gentry vs. Mominiss, 3 Dana, Ky. 382 ) WHAT IS THE PRE-REQUISITE FOR THE ADMISSION OF THE OBJECT EVIDENCE? The object must be first identified, which means that it must be shown, by independent evidence, that the object offered is the thing in dispute ( People vs. Besold, 154 Cal. 363) WHAT ARE DOCUMENTS AS EVIDENCE? Documents as evidence consists of writings or any material containing letters, words, numbers, figures, symbols or other modes of written expressions offered as proof of their contents ( Sec. 2, Rule 130 ) STATE THE BEST EVIDENCE RULE When the subject of inquiry is the contents of a document, no evidence shall be admissible other than the original document itself (Sec. 3, Rule 130 ) THE RULE IS THAT, NO EVIDENCE SHALL BE ADMISSIBLE OTHER THEN THE DOCUMENTS ITSELF, ARE THERE EXCEPTION? Yes, in the following cases: a. when the original has been lost or destroy, or cannot be produced in court, without bad faith on the part of the offeror; b. when the original is in the custody or under the control of the party against whom the evidence is offered, and the latter fails to produce it after reasonable notice; c. when the original consists of numerous accounts or other documents which cannot be examined in court without great loss of time and fact sought to be established from them is only the general result of the whole; and d. when the original is a public record in the custody of a public officer or is recorded in a public
EVIDENCE?
No. A party who calls for the production of a document and inspects the same is not obliged to offer it as evidence WHAT IS PAROL EVIDENCE? Parol evidence literally means oral or verbal testimony of a witness ( Ballentine’s Law Dict.., 2 nd^ Ed., p. 932 ) However, in the application of the rule, it has been extended to writings other than the complete written agreement of the parties ( Phil. Sugar Estates Dev. Co. vs. Gov’t of P.I. 247 U.S. 385; Woodhous vs. Halili, 93 Phil. 526 ) Another term for parol evidence is intrinsic evidence or evidence aliunde ( Uy Coque vs. Sioca, 43 Phil. 405 ) STATE THE RULE WHEN THE TERMS OF AGREEMENT ARE PUT TO WRITING 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 ( Sec. 9, Rule 130 ) UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES MAY A PARTY PRESENT EVIDENCE TO MODIFY, EXPLAIN OR ADD TO THE TERMS OF THE WRITTEN EVIDENCE? 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; a. an intrinsic ambiguity mistake, or imperfection in the written agreement; b. the failure of the written agreement to express the true intent and agreement of the parties thereto; c. the validity of written agreement; d. the existence of other terms agreed to by the parties or their successors in interest after the execution of the written agreement The term “agreement “includes wills (Sec. 9, Rule 130 )
HOW SHALL THE LANGUAGE OF WRITING BE INTERPRETED?
The language of writing is to be interpreted according to the legal meaning; it bears in the place of execution, unless the parties intended otherwise (Sec. 10, Rule 130) GIVE SOME RULES IN THE INTERPRETATION OF DOCUMENTS In the construction of an instrument where there are several provision of particulars, such a construction is, if possible, to be adopted as will give effect to all ( Sec. 11, Rule 130 ) In the construction of an instrument, the intention of the parties is to be pursued and when a general and a particular provision are inconsistent, the latter is paramount to the former. So a particular intent will control a general one that is inconsistent with it (Sec.12, Rule 130) For the proper construction of an instrument, the circumstances under which it was made, including the situation of the subject thereof and of the parties to it, may be shown, so that the judge may be place in the position of those whose language he is to interpret ( Sec. 13, Rule 130 ) The terms of writing are presumed to have been used in their primary and general acceptation, but evidence is admissible to show that they have local, technical, or otherwise peculiar signification, and were so used and understood in the particular instance, in which case the agreement must be constructed accordingly ( Sec. 14, Rule 130 ) When an instrument consists partly of written words and partly of a printed form, and the two are inconsistent, the former controls the latter ( Sec. 15, Rule 130 ) When the character in which the instruments are difficult to be deciphered, or the language is not understood by the court, the evidence of persons skilled in deciphering the character, or who understand the language is admissible to declare the characters or the meaning of the language ( Sec. 16, Rule 130 ) When the terms of an agreement have been intended in a different sense by the different parties to it, that sense is to prevail against either party in which he supposed the other understood it, and when different constructions of a provision are otherwise equally proper, that is to be taken which the most favorable to the party in whose favor the provision was made ( Sec. 17, Rule 130 ) When an instrument is equally susceptible of two interpretations, one in favor of natural right and the other against it, the former is to be adopted ( Sec. 18, Rule 130 ) An instrument may be construed according to usage, in order to determine its true character ( Sec. 19, Rule 130 )
A deaf and dumb person may testify in any manner satisfactory to the court, as by writing or signs through an interpreter. (People vs. De Leon 50 Phil. 539) If he testifies by signs, there must be an interpreter with whom he may have an understanding by such means (Territory vs. Duran 3 N.M. 189) Otherwise he cannot testify (People vs. Bustos, 51 Phil. 385) IS THE INTOXICATED PERSON COMPETENT TO TESTIFY? Drunkenness does not pursue disqualify a witness from testifying. The port of Pennsylvania said on this matter: “The point of inquiry is the moment of examination. Is the witness then offered so besotted in his understanding as to be deprived of his intelligence? If he is, excluded him; even if he be a hard drinker or habitual drunkard yet, if at that time, he is sober, and possessed of a sound mind, he is to be perceived. “(Gebhar vs. Shindle, 15 Serg. & R. (Pa 283) IS A PERSON UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF OPIUM OR OTHER DRUGS, COMPETENT TO TESTIFY? If the witness at the time of his examination, is so intoxicated by opium or other drugs that he is deprived of his mental powers to such a degree as to be capable of making known his perceptions, he is disqualified from testifying. Otherwise, he is competent HOW CAN THE COMPETENCY OF AN INFANT BE DETERMINED? It is a doctrine laid down in modern decisions that the test of an infant’s competency to testify is his capacity to receive just impressions truly. If he possesses the necessary mental capacity to that effect and comprehends the obligation of an oath, he is a competent witness (Moran, Ibid., p. 579 citing Wheeler vs. U.S. 523) WHO ARE DISQUALIFIED TO BE WITNESS BY REASON OF MARRIAGE? During their marriage, neither the husband nor the wife may testify for or against the other without the consent of the affected spouse, except in a civil case by one against the other or the latter’s direct descendants or ascendants ( Sec. 22, Rule 130 )
WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THE RULE FORBIDDING ONE SPOUSE TO TESTIFY
FOR OR AGAINST THE OTHER?
The rule forbidding one spouse to testify or against the other is based on principles which are deemed important to preserve the marriage relation as one of full confidence and affection, and that this is regarded as more important in public welfare than that the exigencies of the lawsuits should authorize domestic peace to be disregarded for the sake of ferreting out some fact within the knowledge of strangers ( U.S. vs. Concepcion, 31 Phil 182 ) WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES OF THE RULE OF FORBIDDING ONE SPOUSE TO TESTIFY FOR OR AGAINST THE OTHER? There are three: a. that the spouse for or against whom the testimony of the other is offered, is a party to the case; b. that the spouse are legally married; and c. that the case is not by one against the other ( Moran, Remedial Law Reviewer, p. 584 ) IN ONE CASE, THE DEFENDANT, WHO WAS ACCUSEDOF KILLING HIS SON TESTIFIED IN HIS OWN BEHALF DID NOT LIMIT HIMSELF TO DENYING THAT HE WAS A KILLER BUT WENT FURTHER AND IMPUTED THE CRIME TO HIS WIFE. MAY THE WIFE BE ALLOWED TO TESTIFY IN REBUTTAL AGAINST THE HUSBAND ’S CONSENT? Yes. In giving such testimony, the husband must, in all fairness, be held to have intended all its natural and necessary consequences. By his said act, the husband – himself exercising the very right which he would deny to his wife upon the ground of their marital relations – must be taken to have waived all objections to the latter’s testimony upon rebuttal, even considering that such object would have been available at the outset. (People vs. Francisco, 78 Phil 694) WHO ARE QUALIFIED TO BE WITNESS BY REASON OF DEATH OR INSANITY OF ADVERSE PARTY?
c. A person authorized to practice medicine, surgery or obstetrics cannot in a civil case, without the consent of the patient, be examined as to any advice or treatment given by him or any information which he may have acquired in attending such patient in a professional capacity, which information was necessary to enable him to act in that capacity, and which would blacken the reputation of the patient. d. A minister or priest cannot, without the consent of the person making the confession made to or any advice given by him in his professional character in the course of discipline enjoined by the church to which the minister or priest belongs; e. A public officer cannot be examined during his term of office or afterwards, as to communications made to him in official confidence, when the courts find that the public interest would suffer by the disclosure. (Sec., Rule 130) GIVE THE REQUISITES OF THE RULE ON MARITAL COMMUNICATIONS a. The spouses are legally married; b. The communication, oral or written, is made during the marriage;. c. The communication is confidential. (Nuevas, Ibid., p. 559) WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THIS PRIVELEGE? The reason is to preserve the peace of families and maintain the sacred institution of marriage. (Nuevas, Ibid., p. 559 citing Mever svs. State, 40 Fla. 216). MAY THE PRIVILEGE BE WAIVED AND IF SO, HOW AND BY WHOM? The privilege is claimable by the spouse not called as a witness, so that it is waivable only by him or her; and it is waivable by any act of such spouse which might be considered as an express or implied
consent to the disclosure of the communication. (Neuvas, Ibid., citing People vs. Hayes, 140 N.Y. 484). GIVE THE REQUISITES OF THE PRIVILEGE OF ATTORNEY AND CLIENT The following: There must be a relation of attorney and client; There must be a communication by the client to the attorney, or advice thereon given by the latter to the former; The communication or advice must have been given confidentially; The communication must have been made in the course of professional employment. WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THIS PRIVILEGE? The reason is to promote the confidence of the people in attorneys for their work is essential to the administration of justice and to encourage the freedom of consultation of lawyers for clients. (Nuevas, Ibid., p. 561 citing Fosters vs. Hall, 12 Pick 89; Alexander vs. U.S., 138 U.S. 353) MAY THE LAWYER BE COMPELLED TO TESTIFY ON COMMUNICATIOS MADE TO HIM AS TO A FUTURE CRIME OR WRONG? WHY? YES, because those communications are not covered by the privilege for the reason that a lawyer is not supposed to be consulted on a future crime or wrong. (Matthews vs. Hoaglang, 21 Atl. 1054) MAY A LAWYER BE COMPELLED TO TESTIFY ON COMMUNICATIONS MADE TO HIM AS TO A PAST CRIME OR WRONG? WHY? NO, for those communications are protect by the privilege. (Alexander vs. U.S., 138 U.S. 353) WHAT IS THE DURATION OF THIS PRIVILEGE?
