When circumstantial evidence is sufficient

Reviewer; Revised Rules on Evidence

for conviction:
a. More than one circumstantial evidence;
Evidence- the means sanctioned by the rules, of
b. The facts from which the interferences are
ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the truth
derived are proven; and
respecting a matter of fact. (Sec 1, rule 128)
c. The combination of all the circumstances is
such as to produce a conviction beyond
Problems in Evidence
reasonable doubt.
1. Determine which pieces of evidence is
admissible;
“The corollary rule is that the circumstances
2. Proper presentation so that the court will
proven must constitute an unbroken chain
consider it in resolving issues and deciding the
which leads to one fair and reasonable
case.
conclusion pointing to the accused, to the
exclusion of all others, as the guilty person”
Three types of truth
(Trinidad vs. People; June 13, 2012)
1.Factual or moral truth- what the court seeks
to know;
3. Positive Evidence- exists when the witness
2.Judicial truth- truth found by the courts based
affirms in the stand that a certain state of
on the evidence presented; and
facts does exist or that a certain event
3.Ideal/ Perfect justice-when the judicial truth is
happened;
the same with the factual truth.
4. Negative Evidence- denies the existence of
fact:
Proof vs. Evidence
 Positive evidence prevails over negative
Proof Evidence evidence;
 Positive assertion is given more weight
Effect of result of Medium of proof
over plain denial
evidence
5. Best evidence/ Primary evidence- is a kind
of evidence which assures the greatest
certainty of fact sought to be proved, and
Factum Probans vs. Factum Probandum which does not in itself, indicate the
existence of other and better proof.
Factum Probans Factum Probandum
6. Secondary Evidence-necessary inferior and
The facts or material The facts or
shows on its face that a better evidence
evidencing the fact or proposition to be
exists;
proposition to be established;
established; 7. Conclusive evidence- evidence which is
incontrovertible or one which the law does
Evidentiary fact Fact to be proved
not allow to be contradicted.
tending to prove the
fact in issue 8. Prima facie evidence- that which standing
alone unexplained or uncontradicted is
sufficient to maintain the proposition
Classification of Evidence
affirmed. By itself, it is sufficient to establish
1. Direct evidence- proves a fact without the
the factum probandum if no evidence to the
need to make an inference from another fact;
contrary appears.
2. circumstantial evidence- proves a fact which
is taken singularly or collectively indirectly; 9. Cumulative evidence- additional evidence of
-only in criminal the same kind and character as that already
cases (sec.4, rule 133)

1
Grande, MRCG (2020)
 given and tends to prove the same Uniformity of Rules on Evidence in judicial
proposition proceedings:
GR:The rules on evidence shall be the same in
10. Corroborative evidence- additional
all courts and in all trials and hearings
evidence of a different kind and character from
EXCEPT as otherwise provided by law or these
that already given, tending to prove the same
rules, such as those enumerated under sec. 4 of
point.
Rule 1 of Rules of Court: (NICOLE)
 Naturalization proceedings;
Types of Evidence as to form
Object evidence- evidence directly addressed to  Insolvency proceedings;
the senses of the court and is capable of being  Cadastral Proceedings
exhibited to examined or viewed by the court  Other cases as may be provided by law;
(sec.1, Rule 130)  Land registration cases; and
1. Documentary evidence-consists or writing,  Election cases.
recordings, photographs or any material
containing letters, words, sounds, numbers, Evidence in Civil Procedure vs. Evidence in
figures, symbols, or their equivalent, or Criminal Procedure
other modes of written expression offered
as proof of their contents. ( Sec. 2, R130) Evidence in Civil Evidence in Criminal
Procedure Procedure
2. Testimonial evidence- oral or written Preponderance of Proof beyond
testimony of a witness. evidence reasonable doubt
Offer of compromise Offer of compromise
Sources of Rules on Evidence is not an admission of by the accused may
1. Rules of Court; liability and is not be received as
2. Constitution; admissible in evidence evidence
3. Special laws;
4. Revised Penal Code;
Classification of Rules on Evidence
5. Civil Code;
6. Jurisprudence; and
1. Rules on probative value
7. Supreme Court Circulars.
a) exclusionary rules- rules that exclude
evidence on the ground of public
Liberal Construction of the Rules on Evidence
policy;
Considering that the Rules on Evidence is part
b) Preferential Rule- requires admission
of the Rules of Court, it shall be liberally
of evidence in preference of any
construed in order to promote their objective of
other because they are more
securing a just, speedy, and inexpensive
trustworthy;
disposition of every action and proceeding.
c) Analytical Rules- subject certain kinds
of evidence to rigid scrutiny to expose
Waiver or Rules on Evidence:
witnesses of their shortcoming;
As a GENERAL RULE, parties cannot waive Rules
d) Propilactic Rule- apply before cases to
on Evidence either by stipulation or contract,
avoid risks of falsity and mistake;
EXCEPT rules that are merely for the protection
e) Rule on Separation and exclusion of
of witnesses. However, rules which are
witness
grounded on public policy cannot be waived.
f) Quantitative Rule- requires certain
kind of evidence to produce in
specific number.

2
Grande, MRCG (2020)
2. Rule of Extrinsic Policy- seek to exclude Principle of Excluded Material Evidence
useful evidence for the sake of other evidence a) Exclusionary Principle- evidence
which is paramount. obtain on illegal seizure will be
excluded in trial;
Requisites for the Admissibility of Evidence b) Doctrine of the fruit of the
poisonous tree- illegally seized
1. It must be RELEVANT to the issue evidence is obtained as a direct
sought to be proved; and result of the illegal act
2. It must be COMPETENT or not
otherwise excluded by the Exceptions:
Constitution, the law, or these rules. a) Doctrine of inevitable
discovery
Axioms/ Conditions of Admissibility b) AttentuationDoctine-
applies only if there’s
1. Relevancy- none but facts which have casual relation
probative value is admissible; between illegal action
a) rational and logical relevancy- and evidence
connection to the issue to
establish fact; Evidence Excluded by Constitution
b) Legal Relevancy- evidence offer
to prove matter which is 1. Obtained in violation of right against
properly put in issue; unreasonable search and seizure;
2. In violation of right to privacy and
 Components of Relevancy inviolability of communication;
a) corroborative value 3. Extrajudicial confession; and
b) material 4. Those obtained in violation of right
 Collateral in Criminal cases against self-incrimination.
a) antecedents circumstance
b) concommuntant Kinds of Admissibility
circumstances- accompany the
commission; 1. Multiple Admissibility- where the
c) subsequent circumstances- evidence is relevant and competent for
concur after commission of the two or more purpose, such evidence
crime may be admitted for any purpose for
which it is offered provided it satisfies
GR. Motive is generally irrelevant all the requirements for its
Exceptions: admissibility;
i. Evidence is purely circumstantial;
2. Curative / Opening the door/ fighting
ii. When there’s doubt as to the identity
fire with fire- where the improper
of the accused;
evidence was admitted for the
iii. Motive is element of the offense
objection of the opposing party, he
charge.
should be permitted to contradict it
with similar improper evidence.
2. Competency- not excluded by law or by
rules; 3. Conditional Admissibility- where the
evidence at the time of its offering
appears to be immaterial or irrelevant

3
Grande, MRCG (2020)
 unless it is connected with the other derivative evidence derived from it is also
facts to subsequently proved, such inadmissible;
evidence may be received on the Exception: When the secondary evidence to
condition that the other facts will be which an objection is also made would have
proved thereafter, otherwise, stricken been inevitably discovered by law enforcement
out of the record. authorities by sources or procedures
independent of the illegal search or seizure (P.
Admissibility vs. Weight vs.Alicando)

Admissibility Weight (probative Rule 129: What Need Not Be Proved

value)
Refers to the Refers to the question Matters that are relieved from presenting
question of whether of whether or not the evidence/ what need not to be proved: (sec. 1)
or not the evidence is evidence proves an 1. Matters which are subject of judicial
to be considered at issue; notice;
all; 2. Matters which are subject of judicial
admission;
Pertains to its Pertains to its
3. Matters which are legally presumed;
relevance and tendency to convince
4. Matters which are stipulated by parties
competence; and persuade;
and counsel;
Depends on logic and Depends on 5. Matters which are exclusively within
law; guidelines the knowledge of opposing party;
6. Matters which are irrelevant;
Factual issue- arises when material allegation is 7. Matters in the nature of negative
specifically denied; allegations subject to certain limit
Question of fact- exists when doubt arises as to
the truthfulness or falsehood of fact; Judicial Notice-the cognizance of certain facts
which judges may properly take and act on
Legal issue- exists as to the application of the without proof because they already know them;
law; (P vs. Tundag)
Fact in issue- ultimate fact which the party -The object of judicial notice is to save time,
relies as his arguments; those which the labor and expense in securing and introducing
plaintiff must prove in order to establish his evidence on matters which are not ordinarily
claim and those facts which the defendant must capable of dispute and are not bona fide
prove in order to establish a defense set up by disputed and the tenor of which can safely be
him, but only when the fact alleged by one assumed from the tribunal’s general knowledge
party is not admitted by the other party or a slight search on its past.
Exculpatory Evidence- evidence favorable to
the defendant in a criminal trial that exonerates Kinds of Judicial Notice
or tends to exonerate the defendant of guilt; 1. Mandatory; and
Inculpatory Evidence- evidence tends to 2. Discretionary.
present guilt;
General Class of Judicial Notice
1. Adjudicative Matter;
Doctrine of the “Fruit of the Poisonous Tree”- 2. Legislative Matter- facts which relate to
once the primary source is shown to have been the existence of law
unlawfully obtained, any secondary or

4
Grande, MRCG (2020)
Subjects which are subject to mandatory Judicial notice of contents of other cases
judicial notice: (EP-NAPOON-TG) (sec.1, As a general rule, courts should not take judicial
Rule129) notice of the evidence presented in other
1. Existence and territorial extent of proceedings, even in the same court or have
states; been heard and are actually pending before the
2. Political history, forms of government, same judge. (P vs. Kulais)
and symbols of nationality; Exceptions:
3. Law of nations c. The parties present them in evidence,
4. Admiralty and maritime courts of the absent any opposition from the other
world; party; or
5. Political constitution and history of the d. The court, in its discretion, resolves to
Philippines; do so.
6. Official acts of the legislative, executive
and judicial departments of the Doctrine of Processual Presumption/ Doctrine
National Government of the of Presumed Identity Approach
Philippines; Where a foreign law is not pleaded or even if
Note: MTC are mandatorily required to pleaded, is not proved, the presumption is that
take judicial notice of laws and foreign law is the same as ours.
ordinance of the city or municipality
where they sit. Judicial Notice, when hearing necessary (Motu
7. Official acts of the legislative, executive proprio or upon motion of party) (sec3,
and judicial departments of the Rule129)
Philippines; a. During pre-trial; and
8. Laws of nature; b. Trial
9. Measure of time; and c. Before judgment; or
10. Geographical divisions. d. On appeal

Discretionary Judicial Notice (PUOF-PC) Age

1. Matters which are of Public knowledge As required by law, as to any other matters such
2. Matters capable of unquestionable as age, a hearing is required before courts can
demonstration; take judicial notice of such facts. ( P vs. Tundag)
3. Matters ought to be known to judges
because of their judicial functions; Judicial admission
(sec2) An admission, oral or written made by the party
4. Foreign laws; in the course of the proceedings in the same
5. Pending cases in the court of same case, does not require proof.
level; and
6. customs Requisites for a valid judicial admission:
1. Definite
Foreign Laws 2. Certain, and
GR. Foreign laws do not prove themselves nor 3. Unequivocal (Republic vs. Sb)
can a court take judicial notice of them It must
be alleged and proved. GR. A judicial admission is conclusive upon the
Exceptions: party making it and does not require proof.
a. When the court has actual knowledge (sec4, Rule 129)
of the foreign laws; Exceptions:
b. When the court has already ruled upon 1. Made through palpable mistake; or
in a case involving the said foreign law.

5
Grande, MRCG (2020)
 2. The imputed admission was not, in fact, stored images, x-ray films, motions,
made. pictures or videos. (sec2, r.130)
3. Testimonial Evidence- statement of
witness offered to the court. It may
be oral or by judicial affidavit;
Effect of Judicial Admission in the pleading
An admission made in the pleadings cannot be Original Document Rule
controverted by the party making such Original document must be produced when the
admission and are conclusive as to such party, subject of the inquiry is the contents of a
and all proofs to the contrary or inconsistent document, writing, recording, photograph or
therewith should be ignored, whether objection other record. (sec.3, Rule 130)
is interposed by the party or not. Exceptions: (PLANN)
 Stipulation of facts is a judicial admission a. When the original is a public record in the
and in the absence of a showing that “(1) the custody of a public officer or is recorded
admission was made through palpable in public office
mistake”, or that “(2) no such admission was b. Original is lost or destroyed, or cannot be
made, the admissions bind the declarant. produced in court, without bad faith on
(Diego vs. SB) the part of the offeror;
c. When the original is in the custody or
Admissions made by counsel under the control of the party against
GR: admissions made by counsel are binding whom the evidence is offered, and the
upon his client. latter fails to produce it after reasonable
Exceptions: reckless or gross negligence of notice, or the original cannot be obtained
counsel; by local judicial processes or procedures;
d. When the original consists of numerous
Rule of Admissibility (Rule 130) accounts or other documents which
cannot be examined in court without
 Evidence must be offered and admitted great loss of time and the fact sought to
otherwise the court will not accept the same. be established from them is only the
 You cannot prove what you did not allege general result of the whole;; and
including circumstances. e. When the original is not closely-related to
a controlling issue.
Three Major Kinds of Evidence
1. Object or Real Evidence-those Photograph- includes still pictures, drawings,
addressed to the sense of the court; stored images, x-ray films, motion pictures or
-when relevant to the fact in issue, videos. (sec2, rule 130)
it may be exhibited to, examined or
viewed by the court;
Original of a document- the document itself or
2. Documentary Evidence-documents
any counterpart intended to have the same
consist of writings, recordings,
effect by a person executing of issuing it.
photographs or any material
containing letters, words, sounds,
numbers, figures, symbols, or other Original of a photograph- includes the negative
equivalent, or other modes of or any print therefrom. Any printout or other
written expression offered as proof output readable by sight or other means, shown
of their contents. Photographs to reflect the data accurately of data stored in a
include still pictures, drawings, compute or similar device.

6
Grande, MRCG (2020)
Duplicate- counterpart produced by the same 3. By the person in whose custody the
impression as the original or from the same document was lost, and unable to find
matrix, or by means of photography, including it; or
enlargements and miniatures, or by mechanical 4. Those who has made any other
or electronic re-recording or by chemical investigation which is sufficient to
reproduction, or by other equivalent technique satisfy the court that the instrument is
which accurately reproduce the original; indeed lost.
GR: A duplicate is admissible to the same
extent as an original. The due execution of a document may be
Except: proven by: EBePreSaCo
1. Genuine question is raised as to the 1. Person or persons who executed it;
authenticity of the original; or 2. By the person before whom its
2. It is unjust or inequitable to admit execution was acknowledged; or
the duplicate in lieu of the original. 3. By any person who was present and
saw it executed; or
Secondary Evidence 4. Who after its execution, saw it and
When the original document has been lost or recognized the signatures; or
destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, the 5. By a person to whom the parties to the
offeror, upon proof of its execution or existence instrument had previously confessed
and the cause of its unavailability without bad the execution thereof. (Ong vs. CA)
faith on his or her part, may prove its content
by: (CoRT) Secondary evidence may be presented when
1. copy; the original document is in adverse party’s
2. recital of its contents in some authentic custody or control; (PNP F)
document, or If the document is in the custody or under the
3. testimony of a witness in the order control of adverse party secondary evidence
stated. can be presented subject to the following
requirements:
Offeror must prove the: 1. Original is in the adverse party’s
1. unavailability of the original is without possession;
bad faith on the part of the offeror; 2. There must be a reasonable notice to
2. execution or existence of the original; produce the original;
3. loss and destruction of the original or 3. That there must be satisfactory proof of
its non production in court; and its existence;
4. Proof of due execution of the 4. That there is failure on the part of the
document. adverse party to produce it despite
notice.
How to prove loss or destruction of the original
document: When presentation of summary is allowed:
1. The loss may be shown by any person (sec7, rule 131)
who knew the fact of its loss; or 1. When the contents of documents,
2. By anyone who has made in the records, photographs, or numerous
judgment of the court, a sufficient account are voluminous;
examination in the place or places 2. It cannot be examined in court without
where the document or papers of great loss of time; and
similar character are usually kept; 3. The fact sought to be established is only
general result of the whole.

7
Grande, MRCG (2020)
Note: The originals shall be available for 4. To prove that parol contract is
examination or copying or both by the adverse motivating in driving cause of
party at a reasonable time and place. The court agreement; (Mactan Airport vs. CA)
may order that they be produced in court. 5. To show that the contract is fictitious (
(sec7, rule 131) Palanca vs Fred Willer Co.,)

Original document in the custody of a public Instances of the exception

officer or is recorded in a public office Fraud:
When the original of document is in the custody 1. I t must be material and serious;
of public officer or is recorded in a public office, 2. Employed by one party;
its contents may be proved by a certified copy 3. Deliberate intent to deceive
issued by the public officer in custody thereof. 4. Other party must rely on the statement
(sec8, rule 131) which later turns out to be untrue.
Other Party should not be negligent.
Sec8, rule 131 Party who calls for document
not bound to offer it; Testimonial Evidence
Consists of the statement of a witness offered
Parol Evidence Rule- provides that when the to the court; It may be oral/live or by judicial
terms of an agreement have been reduced into affidavit.
writing, it be considered as containing all the
terms agreed upon and there can be, as Witness- refers to a person who testifies in a
between the parties and their successors in case or gives evidence before a judicial tribunal.
interest , no evidence of such terms other that
the contents of the written agreement. Qualifications of a witness:
Exceptions: (VISA) 1. Can perceive; and
1. Validity of a written agreement to 2. Perceiving;
express the true intent of the parties 3. Can make known their perception to
thereto; others.(sec21, rule 131)
2. The failure of the written agreement to
express the true intent of the parties Qualified to perceive but not qualified to make
thereto; known of his perception to others is pro tanto
3. Subsequent agreements or the to testify.
existence of other term; and
4. Intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or Conviction of false testimony, falsification or
imperfection in the written agreement. perjury
(sec10, rule 131) Person convicted of the crime thereof is not
necessary disqualify from becoming a witness in
Instances for admission of Parol Evidence court. As long as he’s able to perceive,
1. To prove agreement/ stipulations prior perceiving, and can make known their
to a contract; (Peabody Co., vs Ross) perception to others he can be a witness.
2. To show that there was duress or Religious or political belief, interest in the
fraudulent representation based on outcome of the case, or conviction of a crime,
writing; unless provided by law, shall not be ground for
3. Mortgage executed without due disqualification. (sec21, rule 131)
consideration (Everland vs.
Eastermining) … Since she possesses the qualifications of
being able to perceive and being able to
perceive and being able to make her

8
Grande, MRCG (2020)
perceptions know to others. Furthermore, she Two Kinds of Incompetency
possesses none of the disqualifications. There
is no substantive or procedural rule which 1. Absolute Disqualification- a person is
requires a witness for a party to present some forbidden to testify on any matter.
form of authorization to testify as a witness for 2. Relative Disqualification- a person is
the party presenting him or her. (AFP and forbidden to testify only on certain
Retirement and Separation Benefits System vs. matters specified under section 39 and
Republic) 24 of rule 130 due to interest or
relationship or to privileges of other
Competent witness- a witness who is not parties.
legally disqualified from testifying in courts of
justice, by reason of mental incapacity, interest Effect of failure of a party to object to the
on the commission of crimes, or other cause competency of a witness
excluding him from testifying generally, or It is considered a waiver and once the evidence
rendering him incompetent in respect of the is admitted, the same shall stay in the records
particular subject matter, or in a particular suit. and be judged according to its merits. The judge
has no power to disregard it solely for the
Incompetent witness- witness who is reason that it could have been excluded had it
disqualified from testifying in courts of justice, been objected to. Neither may the judge strike
by reason of mental incapacity, interest on the it out of the records. (Marella vs. Reyes)
commission of crimes, or other cause excluding
him from testifying generally, or rendering him Competency vs. Credibility of Witness
incompetent in respect of the particular subject
matter, or in the particular suit. Competency of Credibility of witness
witness
Presumption of Competency It is a matter of law It has nothing to do
GR: when a witness takes the witness stand, the and/or rule with the law or the
law, on ground of public policy presumes that rules
he is competent. The court cannot reject the It has reference to the It refers to the
witness in the absence of proof of his qualifications of a believability of the
incompetency. The burden is, therefore, upon witness as his capacity witness, weight of
the party objection to the competency of a to perceive and to trustworthiness or
witness to establish the ground of communicate his reliability of the
incompetency. (People vs. Pruna) perception. testimony of the
It includes the absence witness.
Exceptions: of any disqualification.
1. The fact that a person has been recently
found of unsound mind by a court of Testimony confined to personal knowledge
competent jurisdiction; (Sec.22, rule 130)
2. That one is an inmate of an asylum for A witness can testify only to those facts which
the insane (Torres vs. Lopez) he or she knows of his or her personal
knowledge that is, which derived from his or
Test of Competency her own perception.
Whether or not the witness is capable of
understanding the duty to tell the truth (p. vs. The personal knowledge of a witness is a
Berry) and is able to perceive the event, and substantive prerequisite for accepting
make known that the perception to others; testimonial evidence that establishes the truth
of a disputed fact. A witness bereft of personal

9
Grande, MRCG (2020)
knowledge of the disputed fact cannot be called one spouse through the hostile
upon for that purpose because his testimony testimony of the other.
derives its value not from the credit accorded to
him as a witness presently testifying but from Duration of the privilege
the veracity and competency of the extrajudicial The privilege lasts only during the marriage. It
sources of his information (Manancol Jr vs DBP) terminates upon divorce or annulment of
death, in which event the surviving spouse may
Disqualification by reason of marriage / testify on any matter not learned in confidence.
Marital Disqualification Rule (sec23, rule 130) (P vs. Basensoy)
During their marriage, the husband or the wife
cannot testify against the other without the But like all other general rules, the marital
consent of the affected spouse, except in a civil disqualification rule has its own exceptions,
case by one against the other, or in a criminal both in civil actions between the spouses and in
case for a crime committed by one against the criminal cases for offenses committed by one
other or the latter’s direct descendants or against the other. Like the rule itself, the
ascendants. exceptions are backed by sound reasons which,
in the excepted cases, outweigh those in
As a general rule, neither husband nor wife shall support of the general rule. For instance, where
in any case be a witness against the other the marital and domestic relations are so
except in a criminal prosecution for a crime strained that there is no more harmony to be
committed by one against the other except preserved nor peace and tranquility which may
when the marital and domestic relations are so be disturbed, the reason based upon such
strained that there is no more harmony to be harmony and tranquility fails. In such a case,
preserved nor peace and tranquility of interests identity of interests disappears and the
disappears and the consequent danger of consequent danger of perjury based on that
perjury based on that identity is non-existent. identity is non-existent. Likewise, in such a
(P. vs . Francisco) situation, the security and confidences of
private life, which the law aims at protecting,
Requisites: will be nothing but ideals, which through their
1. Marriage is valid absence, merely leave a void in the unhappy
2. Testimony is offered during the home. (Alvarez vs Ramirez)
subsistence of marriage;
3. That the other spouse is a party to the Disqualifications by reason of privileged
action. communication (sec.24, rule 130)

Reasons given for the rule are: The following cannot testify as to matters
1. There is identity of interests between learned in confidence in the following case:
husband and wife; 1. Husband and wife;
2. If one were to testify for or against the 2. Attorney, attorney’s secretary,
other, there is consequent danger of stenographer or clerk and client;
perjury; 3. Physicians, psychotherapist and patient
3. The policy of the law is to guard the 4. Minister, priest and penitent;
security and confidences of private life, 5. Doctor and patient;
even at the risk of an occasional failure 6. Public officer during or after his tenure
of justice, and to prevent domestic
disunion and unhappiness; and a. Privileged Communications between
4. Where there is want of domestic husband and wife
tranquility there is danger of punishing

10
Grande, MRCG (2020)
 GR. The husband or the wife during or after Can be invoked only if Can be claimed
the marriage cannot be examined without one of the spouses is a whether or not other
the consent of the other as to any party to the action. spouse is a party to
communication received in confidence by the action;
one from the other during the marriage.
Applies only if the Can be claimed even
Except
marriage is existing at after the marriage is
1. In civil case by one against the
the time the dissolved.
other; or
testimony is offered.
2. In criminal cases for a crime
committed by one against the other Constitutes a total Applies only to
or the latter’s direct descendants or prohibition for or confidential
ascendants. (sec.24(a) rule 130) against the spouse of communications
3. Communication prior to the the witness. between the spouses.
marriage; The objection would The married person is
4. Communication not confidential in be raised on the on the stand but the
character; ground of marriage. objection of privilege
5. When the communication was The married witness is raised when
overheard by a third person; would not be allowed confidential marital
6. In case of dying declaration of one to take the stand at all communication is
spouse to another because of the inquired into.
Requisites: disqualification. Even
1. Valid marital relation if the testimony is, for,
2. Privilege is invoked with respect to a or against the spouse,
confidential communication between the the spouse-witness
spouses given during said marriage; cannot testify.
3. Spouse against whom such evidence is
being offered has not given his or her
Note: However, res gestae declarations of
consent to such testimony
husband and wife are admissible for or against
each other even though each is incompetent to
Valid marriage is essential to invoke this
testify.
privilege
In order that a husband or wife may claim the
b. Privileged Communication between
privilege, it is essential that they be legally
Attorney and Client (sec.24(b),rule 130)
married. If they live together in illicit
The following cannot, without the consent of
cohabitation they are not entitled to the
the client, be examined as to any
privilege. It is immaterial whether they believe
communication made by the client to him or
in good faith that they were legally married, if in
her, or his or her advice given thereon in the
fact they were not.
course or , or with a view, to a professional
employment:
Disqualification by reasons of marriage vs. by
1. Attorney; or
reason of marital privilege
2. Person reasonably believed by the client
to be licensed to engage in the practice
Disqualification by Disqualification by
of law;
reason of marriage reason of marital
3. Attorney’s secretary;
(sec. 23) privilege(sec. 24(a))
4. Stenographer; or
5. Clerk; or
6. Other person assisting the attorney

11
Grande, MRCG (2020)
Note: 3-7 without the consent of the client or Identity of client
employer G.R. A lawyer may not invoke the privilege and
refuse to divulge the name or identity of his
Exceptions: client. (Regala vs Sandiganbayan)
1. Furtherance of a crime or fraud; Exception
2. Claimants trough same deceased client; 1. Where a strong possibility exists that
3. Breach of duty by lawyer or client; revealing the client’s name would
4. Document attested by the lawyer; and implicate the client in the very activity
5. Joint clients for which he sought the lawyer’s advice;
2. Where disclosure would open the client
Requisites: to civil liability;
1. Attorney-client relationship; 3. Where the prosecutors have no case
2. Privilege is invoked with respect to against the client unless by revealing the
confidential communication between client’s name, the said name would
them in the course of professional furnish the only link that would form the
employment; chain of testimony necessary to convict
3. Client has not given his consent to the an individual for a crime. (Regala vs. SB)
testimony of the attorney, secretary, 4. When such communications are for an
stenographer, or clerk, nor does the unlawful purpose, having fore their
attorney give his consent to his said object the commission of a crime.
employees.
Privileged communication between doctor and
Attorney-client relationship patient (sec.24(c), rule 130)
Attorney-client relationship starts when the The following cannot in a civil case, without the
client makes a preliminary consultation with the consent of the patient, be examined as to any
attorney tending to establish a relation, even confidential communication made for the
though there are no free paid by the client. purpose of diagnosis or treatment of the
patient’s physical, mental or emotional
Coverage of the disqualification condition, including alcohol or drug addiction:
1. Verbal statements; 1. Physicians;
2. Documents and papers entrusted to the 2. Psychotherapist; or
attorney by the client; 3. Person reasonably believes by the
3. Those facts learned by the attorney from patient to be authorized to practice
the client. medicine or psychotherapy;
4. Persons, including members of the
Waiver patient’s family, who have participated
The privilege can be waived (express or implied) in the diagnosis or treatment of the
when the client gives his consent or for his patient.
failure to make a timely objection when the
communication is being presented before the Requisites:
court. 1. The privilege is claimed in a civil case;
2. Person against whom the privilege is
Duration of the privilege being claimed is a person duly
The privilege will continue even after the authorized to practice medicine,
attorney-client relationship, or even after the psychology, surgery or obstetrics;
death of the client. (Regala vs SB) 3. That such person acquired the
information while he was attending to
the patient in his professional capacity;

12
Grande, MRCG (2020)
 4. The information was necessary to 3. Made in his or her professional
enable the person to act in that character in the course of the discipline
capacity enjoined by the church to which he
5. The information is confidential and if belongs.
disclosed would tend to blacken the
reputation of the patient. Communications made not in the course of
Note: the physician is acting in his professional religious discipline but in contemplation of a
capacity when he attends to the patient for crime are not privileged. (State v. Brown)
curative, preventive or palliative treatment.
Exceptions:
1. The communication was not given in Exceptions:
confidence; 1. When the penitent consents;
2. Communication is irrelevant to the 2. Third persons overhearing the
professional employment; confession;
3. Communication was made for unlawful 3. The communication is not privilege in
purpose; character or made to a priest not in a
4. Information was intended to be made professional character.
public;
5. Waiver of the privilege either by law or Privilege Communication to Public Officers
contract; (sec. 24 (e) rule 130)
6. Case by the patient against the
physician; and Requisites:
7. Patient gives his consent. 1. There must be official confidential
communication;
A physician may give expert opinion testimony 2. It has been made to a public officer;
in response to a strictly hypothetical question in 3. Disclosure would affect public interest.
a lawsuit involving physical mental condition of
a patient whom he has attended professionally, Duration
where his opinion is based strictly upon the The privilege shall apply not only during the
hypothetical facts stated, excluding and term of office of the public officer, but also
disregarding any personal professional afterwards which makes it permanent.
knowledge he may have concerning such
patient (Lim vs. CA) RA 1405 : Bank Secrecy Law
Section 2 of the bank secrecy law provides that
Psychotherapist- person licensed to practice all deposits in whatever nature with banks or
medicine engaged in the diagnosis or treatment banking institutions are of an “absolutely
of a mental or emotional condition; or confidential nature and may not be examined,
Person licensed as a psychologist by the inquired or looked into by any person,
government while similarly engaged. government official, bureau or office.”
The only exceptions are either written consent
Privilege communication between Priest and of the depositor, in cases of impeachment,
Penitent (sec. 24 (d) rule 130) upon order of a competent court in cases of
bribery or dereliction of duty or public officials,
Requisites: or in cases where the money deposited or
1. Confession made invested is the subject matter of litigation.
2. With a minister, priest, or person RA 6426: Foreign Currency Deposit Act
reasonably believed to be; The law covers the following:

13
Grande, MRCG (2020)
1.) Examination and inquiry into all deposits of Admissions and Confession
whatever nature
2.) Disclosure by any official or employee of Admission – the act, declaration, or omission of
any banking institution to any unauthorized a party as to a relevant fact may be given in
person of any information concerning the evidence against him (Lacbayan vs. Samoy)
deposit in question Confession- acknowledgment of one’s guilt or
liability;
The exceptions are the following:
3.) Under written permission of the depositor Classification of Admission
4.) Cases under the Anti-Money Laundering Act 1. Judicial Admission
5.) If the money was unlawfully taken and a. Formal- made in writing
deposited in a bank, the rightful owner can b. Informal- made orally
inquire into the deposit in question (GSIS vs. 2. Extrajudicial Admission
CA, GR 189206, June 8, 2011 and China 3. Express-made in a definite, certain and
Bank vs. CA, GR 140687, December 18, unequivocal language
2006 -pro hac vice ruling) 4. Implied- those which may be inferred
6.) Under PD 1035, which created the Foreign from the act, conduct, declaration,
Currency Deposit System and PD 1246, both silence or omission of a party
of which amended RA 6426, the protection
of RA 6426 is intended to cover foreign Judicial Admission vs. Extrajudicial Admission
lenders and investors, not tourists Judicial admission Extrajudicial
(Salvacion vs. Central Bank, GR 94723, admission
August 21, 1997) Rule 129, sec 4 Rule 130, sec27
In the course of a Out-of-court
Testimonial Privilege- it is a privilege which proceeding in the declaration
consist of exempting the witness, having same case
attended the court where his testimony is need not to be must be offered in
desired, from disclosing a certain part of his offered in evidence evidence in order to
knowledge. since they already be considered by the
form part of the court
Parental and filial privilege (sec.25, rule 130) records
GR. No person shall be compelled to testify not only is it May be given in
against his or her parents, other direct evidence against the evidence against the
ascendant, children or other direct descendants admitter but it is admitter
except when such testimony is indispensable in binding upon him
a crime against that person or by one parent
May not be May be contradicted
against the other.
contradicted by the by the admitter
admitter except by
Privilege relating to trade secrets (sec.26, rule
showing that the
130)
admission was made
A person cannot be compelled to testify about
through palpable
any trade secret, unless the non-disclosure will
mistake or that no
conceal fraud or otherwise work injustice.
such admission was
When disclosure is directed, the court shall take
made
such protective measure as the interest of the
owner of the trade secret and of the parties and
the furtherance of justice may require.

14
Grande, MRCG (2020)
Admission of a party attention; the privilege against self-
The act, declaration or omission of a party as to incrimination is not limited precisely to
a relevant act may be given in evidence against testimony, but extends to all giving or
him or her (sec27, rule 130) furnishing of evidence. Here, a person is being
compelled to create evidence against himself,
Admission is something less than a confession hence, the privilege against self-incrimination
and is but an acknowledgment of some fact or may be invoked.
circumstances which in itself is insufficient to
authorize a conviction and which tends only to Admission outside custodial investigation
establish the ultimate fact of guilt. (P vs. Admission outside custodial investigation is
Corsino) valid and may be admitted as evidence.

Admission in the course of discovery proceeding Admission Confession

are judicial admission. Declaration made at Usually applied in
any time by a person, criminal cases to
Admission is not hearsay and not a hearsay voluntarily and statements of fact by
exception. without compulsion or the accused which do
inducement stating or not directly involve
Admission is ordinary receivable as evidence as acknowledging that he an acknowledgement
to the substantial truth or relevant back. A man had committed or of the guilt of the
is held to be responsible for his own act. That if participated in the accused, or of
such is not true he should not have said so. commission of a criminal intent to
“No man declares something against himself” crime. commit the offense
with which he is
Requisites of Admissibility of Admissions charged.
1. Involve matters of fact, and not of law; Statement of fact There is
2. Be categorical and definite; which does not acknowledgement of
3. Be knowingly and voluntary made; and involve guilt
4. Be adverse to the admitter’s interest, acknowledgment of
otherwise it would be self-serving and fault or liability
inadmissible. May be express or Always express or
implied tacit
Admissions in amended pleading More of a broader Only limited to the
Once a pleading is amended, it loses its status scope which includes confession of a
as a pleading and ceases to be a judicial confession person
admission (became extra-judicial admission). An
amended pleading supersedes the pleading it May be made by any Can only be made by
amends. party the accused

Admissibility of private books and papers RA 4200 Anti Wire-Tapping Law

If the private book and paper contains Section 1. It shall be unlawful for any person,
testimonial confession, then the privilege not being authorized by all the parties to any
against self-incrimination can be invoked. private communication or spoken word, to tap
any wire or cable, or by using any other device
Compelling to write on paper to produce or arrangement, to secretly overhear, intercept,
handwriting or record such communication or spoken word
Writing is not a purely mechanical act, because by using a device commonly known as a
it requires the application of intelligence and

15
Grande, MRCG (2020)
dictaphone or dictagraph or detectaphone or Verily, no one would ask for forgiveness unless
walkie-talkie or tape recorder, or however he has committed a wrong and a plea for
otherwise described: forgiveness may be considered analogous to an
attempt to compromise, which offer of
Offer of compromise not admissible (sec28, compromise by the appellant may be received
rule 130) in evidence as an implied admission of guilt
pursuan to section 27 of the Revised Rules on
Compromise- contract whereby the parties, by Evidence. (P vs, Dela Cruz)
making reciprocal concessions, avoid litigation
or put an end to one already commenced (NCC, Exception
Art. 2028) a. Involving quasi-offenses (criminal
negligence); or
Offer of compromise- offer to settle a dispute b. Those allowed by law to be
or difference amicably for the purpose of compromised.
avoiding a lawsuit and without admitting
liability. Not admissible in evidence against the offeror:
1. Plea of guilty later withdrawn; or
In civil case: 2. Unaccepted offer of a plea of guilty to a
GR: in civil cases, an offer of compromise is not lesser offense.
an admission of any liability, and is not 3. Statement made in the course of plea
admissible in evidence against the offeror. bargaining with the prosecution on
Exception: when such offer is clearly not only which does not result in a plea of guilty
to buy peace but amounts to an admission of or which results in a plea of guilty later
liability the offered compromise being directed withdrawn
only to the amount paid. (El Veradero de Manila 4. Offer to pay; or
vs. Insular Lumber) 5. Payment of medical, hospital or other
expenses.
To determine the admissibility or non-
admissibility offer to compromise, the Compromise is not allowed in the
circumstances of the case and the intent of the following cases: (CVG-JEFF-H)
party making the offer should be considered-if a 1. Civil status of persons;
party denies the existence of a debt but offers 2. Validity of a marriage or legal
to pay the same for the purpose of buying separation;
peace and avoiding litigation the offer of 3. Any ground for legal separation;
settlement is inadmissible, but if in the course 4. Future support;
thereof, the party making the offer admits the 5. Jurisdiction of courts;
existence of an indebtedness combined with a 6. Future legitime;
proposal to settle the claim amicably, then, the 7. Habeas corpus; and
admission is admissible to prove such 8. Election cases.
indebtedness. (Tan vs. Rodill Enterprises)
Admission by third party (Res Inter Alios Acta)
In Criminal Cases: sec29, rule 130
In criminal cases, except those involving quasi-
offenses (criminal negligence) or those allowed Principle of Res Inter Alios Acta
by law to be compromised, an offer of Things done between strangers ought not to
compromised by the accused may be received injure those who are not parties to it.
in evidence as an implied admission of guilt. The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an
act, declaration, or omission of another.

16
Grande, MRCG (2020)
Consequently, an extrajudicial confession is the business are evidence against the other or
binding only on the confessant0, is not others.
admissible against his or her co-accused and is
considered as hearsay against them. (Tamargo Admission by agent
vs. Awingan) The acts and declarations of an agent made
within the scope of his employment and with
Classification of RIAA the actual or apparent authority of the principal
1. Admission by Third Party (Sec. 29, Rule are binding upon the latter.
130)- the rights of a party cannot be
prejudiced by an act, declaration, or  The partnership must be proven bye
omission, of another, except as hereinafter evidence.
provided such as vicarious admissions.
2. Previous Conduct Rule (Sec 36, Rule 130)- Doctrine of adoptive Admission- an adoptive
evidence that one did or did not do a admission is where a party, by his words or
certain thing at one time is not admissible conduct, voluntarily adopts or ratifies another’s
to prove that he or she did or did not do statement. Evidence of the statement would
the same or similar thing at another time. then be admissible against him. (Rep. vs.
Kenrick Dev’t Corp)
Exceptions to RIAAR
1. Admissions by a co-partner( sec30, rule Admissibility of Angara’s Diary
130) In the Angara Diary, the options of the
2. Admission by a co-conspirator (sec. 31, petitioner started to dwindle when the AFP
rule 130) withdrew its support from him as President and
3. Admission by privies (sec. 32, rule 130) commander-in-chief. Thus the executive
4. Admission by silence (sec. 33, rule 130) secretary Angara had to ask Senate president
5. Interlocking confession; Pimentel to advise petitioner to consider the
option of dignified exit or resignation. Petitioner
Admissions by a co-partner or agent (sec. 29, did not object to the suggested option but
rule 130) simply said he could never leave the country.
Requisites: Petitioner’s silence on this and other related
1. Ac t or declaration of a partner or agent suggestions can be taken as an admission by
of the party must be within the scope of him. (Estrada vs. Desierto)
authority;
2. Made during the existence of the Admission by Conspirator (Sec31, rule 131)
partnership or agency; and
3. After the partnership or agency is Conspiracy- exists when two or more persons
shown by evidence other that such act come to an agreement concerning the
or declaration. commission of a felony and decide to commit.
(Art.8, RPC)
Admission by partner- the admissions of one
partner are received against another, not on the Extrajudicial confession not binding on a co-
ground that they are parties to the record, but accused
on the ground that they are identified in An extrajudicial confession is binding only on
interest, and that each is agent for the other, the confessant, is not admissible against his or
and that the acts or declarations of one during her co-accused and is considered as hearsay
the existence of the partnership, while against them.
transacting its business and within the scope of

17
Grande, MRCG (2020)
The admission referred to by this section Constitutional procedures on custodial
pertains to an extrajudicial declaration of a investigation do not apply to a spontaneous
conspirator, and not to his testimony given on statement, not elicited through questioning by
the stand which is subject to cross-examination. the authorities, but given in an ordinary manner
(P. vs. Serrano) whereby appellant orally admitted having
committed the crime. What the constitution
Applicability to Preliminary investigation bars is the compulsory disclosure of
RIAA rule should not be rigidly applied in incriminating facts or confession. Hence, we
preliminary investigation as long as there is hold that appellant’s confession to the mayor
substantial basis for crediting the hearsay was correctly admitted by the trial court. (P vs.
because such investigation is merely Andan)
preliminary and does not finally adjudicate
rights and obligations of parties. (Reyes vs. Admission to Reporters
Ombudsman) The TV news reporters’ testimonies on record
show that they were acting as media
Verbal confession spontaneously and professionals when they interviewed appellant.
voluntarily given They were not under the direction and control
If a person, before he is arrested and placed of the police. There was no coercion for
under the custodial investigation, voluntarily appellant to face the TV cameras. The record
confesses to the police his commission of a also shows that the interviews took place on
crime, such confession, even if done without several occasions, not just once. Each time, the
the assistance of a lawyer, and is not in appellant did not protest or insist on his
violation of his constitutional right under innocence. Instead, he repeatedly admitted
sec12(1), Art. III of the constitution and is what he had done. He even supplied details of
admissible as evidence. ( P vs. Guting) Keyser’s killing. As held in Andan, statements
spontaneously made by a suspect to news
Admission to the mayor without the assistance reporters during a televised interview are
of counsel voluntary and admissible in evidence. (P vs.
Under these circumstances, it cannot be Guillermo, 2004)
claimed that the appellant’s confession before
the mayor is inadmissible. A municipal mayor Admission by privies (sec.32, rule 130)
has “operational supervision and control” over
the local police and may be deemed a law Privies-are persons who are partakers or have
enforcement officer for purposes of applying an interest in any action or thing, or any
Section 12 (1) and (3) of Article III of the relation to another.
Constitution. However, Andan’s confession to Requisites:
the mayor was not made in response to any 1. There must be and act, declaration, or
interrogation by the latter. In fact, the mayor omission by a predecessor-in-interest;
did not question appellant at all and no police 2. Such must have occurred while he was
authority ordered the appellant to talk to the holding the title to the property; and
mayor. It was the appellant who spontaneously, 3. The admission relates to the property.
freely and voluntarily sought the mayor for a
private meeting. The mayor acted as a Admission by silence (sec. 33, rule 130)
confidant and not as a law enforcer and An act or declaration made in the presence and
therefore did not violate his constitutional within the hearing or observation of a party
rights. who does or says nothing when the act or
declaration is such as naturally to call for action
or comment if not true, and when proper and

18
Grande, MRCG (2020)
possible for him to do so, may be given in Classifications of Confession
evidence against him.
Judicial Confession Extrajudicial
Requisites: Confession
1. There must be an acto or declaration; one made by the One made in any
2. He must have heard or observed the act accused before a other place or
or declaration of the other person; court in which the occasion and cannot
3. He must have the opportunity to deny case is pending and sustain conviction
it; in the course of legal unless corroborated
4. He must have understood the proceedings therein by evidence of corpus
statement; and by itself can delicti.
5. He must have an opportunity to object, sustain a conviction
such that je would naturally have done even in capital
if the statements are not true; offenses.
6. The facts were within his knowledge;
7. The facts admitted or the information Extra-judicial confession binds the confessor
to be drawn from his silence is material only
to the issue. GR. An extrajudicial confession is admissible
against the confessor only. It is incompetent
Silence during custodial investigation evidence against his co-accused for being
Clearly, when appellant remained silent when hearsay and because of the res inter alios acta
confronted by the accusation at the police rule.
station, he was exercising his fasic and Exceptions
fundamental right to remain silent. At that 1. interlocking confessions- if the accused
stage, his silence should not be taken against persons voluntarily and independently
him. executed identical confession without
collusion and corroborated by other
Confession (sec 34, rule 130) evidence;
The declaration of an accused acknowledging 2. when the confessant testified for his co-
his or her guilt of the offense charged, or any defendant;
offense necessarily therein; may be given in 3. if the co-defendants impliedly
evidence against him or her. acquiesced in or adopted said
confession;
 Constitutes evidence of the highest order. 4. where the accused admitted the facts
stated by the confessor after being
Requisites of Confession apprised of such confession;
1. Voluntary 5. if they are charged as co-conspirators of
2. in assistance of competent counsel the crime which was confessed by one
3. Express of the accused and said confession is
4. in writing used only as corroborating evidence;
6. where the confession is used as
Form circumstantial evidence to show the
A confession is not required to be in any probability of participation by the co-
particular form. It may be oral or written, conspirator;
formal or informal in character. It may be 7. Where in the co-conspirator
recorded on video tape, sound, motion pictures, extrajudicial confession is corroborated
or tape. (P. vs. Satorre) by other evidence of record.

19
Grande, MRCG (2020)
Involuntary Confession Hearsay (sec37, rule 130)-
1. Product of method such as torture, etc. GR: Is a statement other than one made by the
2. Without the benefit of Miranda right declarant while testifying a trial or hearing
offered to prove the truth of the facts asserted
No implied confession because confession to therein.
be admissible must be direct, positive and
express admission of guilt. The following are not hearsay:
1. declarant testifies at the trial or hearing and
Previous Conduct as Evidence is subject to cross examination concerning
the statement; and
Similar acts as evidence (sec35, rule 130) 2. the statement is inconsistent with the
Gr: evidence that one did or did not do a certain declarant’s testimony, and was given under
thing at one time is not admissible to prove that oath subject to the penalty of perjury or a
he or she did or did not the same or similar trial, hearing , or other proceeding or in a
thing at another time disposition;
3. statement is consistent with the declarant’s
Similar acts as evidence may be received to testimony and is offered to rebut an
prove: (SKIPS-SCHUL) express or implied charge against the
1. specific intent; or declarant of recent fabrication or improper
2. knowledge; influence or motive; or
3. identity; 4. Statement of one of identification of a
4. plan; person made after perceiving him or her.
5. system;
6. scheme; Types of hearsay statement:
7. custom ; 1. Oral or written assertion; or
8. habit; 2. Nonverbal conduct of a person
9. usage; and intended as an assertion
10. the like
Hearsay Evidence Rule
Unaccepted Offer (sec. 36, rule 130) The rule on Hearsay Evidence states that, a
An offer in writing to pay a particular sum of witness can testify only to those facts which he
money or to deliver a written instrument or knows of his personal knowledge, that is, which
specific personal property is, if rejected without are derived from his own perception, except as
valid cause, equivalent to the actual production otherwise provided.
and tender of the money, instrument, or
property.  Hearsay is not applicable to
Scope: independently relevant statements.
1. payment of sum of money;  Regardless of the truth or falsity of
2. delivery of written instrument; and statement when it is relevant to the
3. Delivery of specific personal statement is admissible.
property.
Reason: Exceptions to Hearsay Rule:
The rule is intended to complement the rule on 1. Dying declarations;
tender of payment under Article 1256 of the 2. Declaration against interest
New Civil Code (Consignation of Payment) 3. Act or declaration about
pedigree;
4. Family reputation or tradition
regarding pedigree;

20
Grande, MRCG (2020)
 5. Common reputation; 3. Serious nature of the wound as would
6. Res gestae; necessarily engender a belief on his part
7. Entries in the ordinary course of that he would not survive therefrom.
business;
8. Entries in official records; Form
9. Others The Revised Rules on Evidence do not require
that a dying declaration must be made in
Note: They are hearsay evidence but they are writing to be admissible. Indeed, to impose
deemed admissible for certain reasons such a requirement would exclude may
statements from a victim in extrimis for want of
Dying declaration (sec. 38, rule 130) paper and pen at a critical moment. (P vs.
(Ante mortem statement or Statement in Viovicente)
Articulo Mortis)
The declaration of a dying person, made under Declarant survived
the consciousness of an impending death, may Declarant should die. If he survives, the
be received in any case wherein his or her death supposed dying declaration is deemed to not be
is the subject of inquiry, as evidence of the admissible in court, nonetheless, he can testify
cause and surrounding circumstances of such in court and his utterances may be conserved as
death. part of res gestae.

Requisites: Declaration against interest (Dead Man’s

1. Declaration must concern the cause and Statute) sec. 40, rule 130
surrounding circumstances of declarant’s the declaration made by a person deceased or
death; unable to testify against the interest of the
2. Made under the consciousness of an declarant, if the fact asserted in the declaration
impending death; was at the time it was made so far contrary to
3. He must be a competent witness; and the declarant’s own interest that a reasonable
4. Must be offered in a criminal case for person in his or her position would not have
homicide, murder, or parricide, in which the made the declaration unless he or she believed
declarant is the victim. (People vs Umapas) to be true, may be received in evidence against
himself or herself of his or her successors in
Consciousness of impending death interest and against third persons.
The declarant must at the time of making his A statement tending to expose the declarant to
ante mortem statement believe that death was criminal liability and offered to exculpate the
inevitable not merely possible or even probable accused is not admissible unless corroborating
but a definite certainty, that is, he must have no circumstances clearly indicate the
hope of recovery whatsoever. trustworthiness of the statement.
However, death need not follow soon. It is the
belief of the impending death and not the rapid Requisites:
succession of death in point of fact that renders 1. Declarant is dead or unable to testify;
the dying declaration admissible. (P vs. Bautista) 2. That it relates to a fact against the
interest of the declarant;
Considerations in determining whether the 3. That at the time he made said
declarations were made under the impending declaration the declarant was aware
consciousness of death: that it was contrary to his aforesaid
1. Words or statements of the declarant; interest; and
2. Declarant’s conduct at the time of 4. That the declarant had no motive to
declaration; falsify and he believed such declaration.

21
Grande, MRCG (2020)
 2. other family books; or
Form 3. charts,
A declaration against interest may be oral or 4. engravings on rings,
written. Its form is immaterial, provided all he 5. family portraits; and
essential requisites for its admissibility are 6. the like
present.
Part of Res Gestae (sec. 44, rule 130)
Act or declaration about pedigree (sec. 41, rule Statements made by a person while a starting
130) occurrence is taking place or immediately prior
The act or declaration of a person deceased, or or subsequent thereto, under the stress of
unable to testify, in respect to the pedigree of excitement caused by the occurrence with
another person related to him or her by birth, respect to the circumstances thereof, may be
adoption, or marriage, or in the absence given in evidence as part of res gestae. So, also,
thereof, which whose family he or she was so statements accompanying an equivocal act
intimately associated as be like;y t ohave material to the issue, and giving it a legal
accurate information concerning his or her significance, may be received as part of the res
pedigree may be received in evidence where it gestae.
occurred before the controversy, and the
relationship between the two persons is shown Res Gestae- comprehends a situation which
by evidence other than such act or declaration. presents a startling or unusual occurrence
The word "pedigree" includes relationship, sufficient to produce a spoontaneous and
family genealogy, birth, marriage, death, the instinctive reaction, during which interval
dates when and the places where these fast certain statements are made under such
occurred, and the names of the relatives. It circumstances as to show lack of forethought or
embraces also facts of family history intimately deliberate design in the formulation of their
connected with pedigree. content. (P vs. Peña)

Pedigree- includes relationship, family Types of Res Gestae

genealogy, birth, marriage, death, the dates 1. Spontaneous Statements- statements
when and the places where these facts made by a person while a startling
occurred, and the names of the relatives, it also occurrence is taking place or immediately
embraces facts of family history intimately prior or subsequent thereto with respect
connected with pedigree. to the circumstances thereof.

Family reputation or tradition regarding Requisites for Admissibility

pedigree (sec. 42, rule 130) a) Principal act, the res gestae, is a
The reputation or tradition existing in a family startling occurrence;
previous to the controversy, in respect to the b) The statements were made before the
pedigree of any one of its members, may be declarant had time to contrive or
received in evidence if the witness testifying devise; and
thereon be also a member of the family, either c) The statements concern the
by consanguinity or affinity or adoption. Entries occurrence in question and its
in family bibles or other family books or charts, immediately attending circumstances
engravings on rings, family portraits and the
like, may be received as evidence of pedigree. Factors:
a. Time that lapsed between the
May be established by: occurrence of the act or transaction
1. Entries in family bibles; or and the making of the statement.

22
Grande, MRCG (2020)
 b. Place where the statement was made; officer of the Philippines, or by a person in the
c. Condition of the declarant when he performance of a duty specially enjoined by
made the statement; law, are prima facie evidence of the facts
d. Presence or absence of intervening therein stated.
events between the occurrence and
the statement relative thereto, and Requisites for admission as evidence:
e. Nature and circumstances of the 1. Entries was made by a public officer, or
statement itself. by another person
2. Verbal Acts- statement accompanying in 2. Public officer or another person who
equivocal act material to the issue, and created the entries is specially enjoined
fiving it legal significance by law to do so;
3. That the public officer or the person
Requisites: had sufficient knowledge of the facts by
a. The principal act to be characterized him stated which must have been
must be equivocal; acquired by him personally or through
b. The equivocal act must be material to official information.
the issue
c. The statement must accompany the Opinion Rule
equivocal act; and GR: The opinion of witness is not admissible
d. The statements five a legal significance (sec. 51,rule 130)
to the equivocal. Exceptions:
1. Opinion of expert witness- on matter
Records of regularly conducted business requiring special knowledge, skill,
activity (sec. 45, rule 130) experience, training or education, which
he or she is shown to possess may be
The ff are admissible as evidence (exempted received in evidence (sec. 52, rule 130)
from hearsay evidence) 2. Opinion of ordinary witness provided
1. Memorandum proper basis is given
2. Report
3. Record or data compilation of acts, Opinion of Expert Witness (sec. 52, rule 130)
events, conditions opinions or Expert witness- a person with special
diagnoses, made by writing, typing, knowledge, skill, experience, training or
electronic, optical or other similar education, which he or she is shown to possess
means at or near the time of or near
the time of or from transmission or The Opinion of Ordinary Witness may be
supply of information by a person with received in evidence regarding:
knowledge thereof 1. Identity of a person about whom he or
she has adequate knowledge;
Requisites: 2. A handwriting with which he or she has
1. Such are kept in the regular course or sufficient familiarity; and
conduct of a business activity; and 3. The mental sanity of a person with
2. Such was the regular practice whom he or she is sufficiently
3. Shown by the testimony of the acquainted. (sec. 53, rule 130)
custodian or other qualified witnesses.

Entries in official records (sec. 46, rule 130)

Entries in official records made in the
performance of his or her duty by a public

23
Grande, MRCG (2020)