Yutuc, Kyla Beatrice C.
CRIM3-A
EVIDENCE
1. Definition of Evidence
- Evidence is the means, sanctioned by these rules, of ascertaining in a judicial
proceeding, the truth, respecting a matter of fact.
- Meaning: Evidence is the way by the Rules of Court, in determining the truth of the
actual event in a court trial.
2. Twin requirements for the admissibility of evidence
Relevancy - is when the evidence answers a factual issue such as: who, what, where,
when, and how
Competency - is when the presentation of such evidence is not prohibited or excluded by
the law or the Rules of Court
3. Difference between Admissibility and Credibility of evidence
- Credibility is when the representation or, in the case of a witness, a person’s capability to
remember the facts of the events. Admissibility, on the other hand, is the quality a
material must have for it to be accepted as evidence. Admissibility also has two criteria
for it to be considered admissible, those are relevancy and competency.
4. What need not be proved?
- Those which the courts may take judicial notice (Rule 129);
- Those that are judicially admitted (Rule 129);
- Those that are conclusively presumed (Rule 131); and
- Those that are disputably presumed but uncontradicted (Rule 131).
5. What is a judicial notice?
- It is the recognition or acceptance by a court of certain facts that are commonly known
and accepted as true, without requiring formal evidence to prove them.
6. When is judicial notice mandatory?
- If the facts sought to be proved are:
1. Existence and territorial extent of States;
2. Political history, forms of government, and symbols of nationality;
3. Law of nations;
4. Admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their seals;
5. Political constitution and history of the Philippines;
6. Official acts of legislative, executive, and judicial departments of the Philippines;
7. Laws of nature;
8. Measure of time; and
9. Geographical divisions.
7. When is judicial notice discretionary?
- A court may take judicial notice of matters which are of public knowledge, or are capable
to unquestionable demonstration, or ought to be known to judges because of their
judicial functions.
8. What is judicial admission?
- This means that if a party in a case makes a statement, either verbally or in writing, that
admits or concedes a fact relevant to the case, then that statement does not require any
further proof or evidence.
9. What is admission by silence?
- It refers to a situation where a party fails to respond or object to a statement or question
made by another party, and as a result, it is assumed that they agree with or admit to the
truth of that statement or question.
10. What are the three major types of evidence?
a. Object evidence - It means that physical objects can be used as evidence in court if
they are relevant to the case and can help prove or disprove a fact that is in question.
The court may examine or view the object if necessary to determine its relevance or
authenticity. Example for estafa case: forged documents and property or goods
misrepresented.
b. Documentary evidence - It means that written materials such as documents, letters, or
papers can be presented as evidence in court to prove their contents. These written
materials can include any type of written expression, such as words, numbers, figures,
symbols, or other forms of writing. Examples may be receipts from bank transactions,
messages, or conversations between the perpetrator and victim.
Note: They may also be object evidence.
Difference between object and documentary: The content of the document makes it a
documentary. The object shows the existence of the fact. In other words, a documentary
serves as a supplementary to object evidence.
Can document be object: Yes. It may be offered as physical and documentary under
the Principle of Multiple Admissibility (meaning that evidence can be admissible for
one and inadmissible for the other and the same evidence can serve multiple purposes)
c. Testimonial evidence - oral evidence elicited from a mouth witness. It also means a
narration of a person made under oath. Examples may be witnesses who saw how the
perpetrator swayed the victim to engage in their fraud acts and testimonies of other
victims of the accused.
11. Kinds of object evidence and example
a. Unique - they are those that have readily identifiable marks
Examples: murder weapon and (estafa case) stolen item.
b. Non-unique - no identifiable marks, so the chain of custody is used to mark it.
Examples: blood or fibers and (estafa case) bank records or financial documents related.
c. Made unique - they are made readily identifiable.
Examples: audio or video recordings and (estafa case) expert analysis such as
questioned document examination.
12. What is Original Document Rule?
- It means that if a document is important to a court case, the original document is usually
required to be presented in court as evidence, rather than a copy or a summary of the
document. For example, in the estafa case that involves a loan agreement, the original
loan agreement document is to be presented as evidence.
13. When to admit secondary/duplicate evidence?
- Secondary or duplicate evidence may be admitted when the original document is lost or
destroyed, or cannot be produced in court despite reasonable efforts to locate it.
14. What is Parol Evidence Rule?
- It means that when two parties enter into a written agreement, any prior oral or verbal
agreements that are not included in the written document are generally not admissible as
evidence to contradict or change the terms of the written agreement. For example, in an
estafa case, if the prosecution presents a written contract, the accused cannot present
evidence of a prior oral agreement that contradicts the terms of the written contract.
15. Who are qualified to become a witness?
- It must be any person who is capable of perceiving and relating the facts relevant to a
case may be qualified as a witness. They must also be under oath.
16. Who are disqualified to become a witness?
- Exceptions are:
a. Incapacity - A person who is unable to perceive or recall the facts relevant to the
case due to mental illness, immaturity, or other factors may be disqualified from
becoming a witness.
b. Personal interest - A person who has a personal interest in the outcome of the
case, such as a party to the case or a close relative of a party, may be
disqualified from becoming a witness.
c. Conviction of a crime - A person who has been convicted of a crime involving
dishonesty or a false statement may be disqualified from becoming a witness.
d. Death or insanity - A person who is deceased or has been declared insane or
mentally incompetent may be disqualified from becoming a witness.
e. Privilege - A person who is protected by a legal privilege, such as an
attorney-client privilege or a doctor-patient privilege, may be disqualified from
becoming a witness.
f. Professional misconduct - A person who has engaged in professional
misconduct, such as perjury or false testimony in a previous case, may be
disqualified from becoming a witness.
17. What is Privileged communication?
- It refers to confidential communications that are protected by law and cannot be
disclosed in court without the consent of the person who made the communication. For
example, the estafa victim communicates with their attorney concerning the case.
18. Who are covered by privileged communication?
- Attorney-client privilege - privilege applies to communications between an attorney
and their client, and is intended to encourage clients to speak freely with their attorneys
to seek legal advice and representation
- Doctor-patient privilege - applies to communications between a patient and their
doctor, and is intended to promote open and honest communication between patients
and their doctors to facilitate diagnosis, treatment, and counseling.
- Priest-penitent privilege - privilege applies to communications made in confidence
between a penitent and a priest.
- Spousal privilege - applies to communications made between spouses during the
marriage, and is intended to promote marital harmony and encourage open and honest
communication between spouses.
19. What is hearsay evidence?
- It is a testimony or statement made by a person who did not directly witness or
experience the events in question but instead heard about them from another person. In
an estafa case, an example would be if a witness testifies that they heard the defendant
say that they never intended to repay the money they borrowed from the victim.
20. Exception to hearsay rule and example.
○ Dying declarations - Statement made by a dying person concerning the cause
and surrounding circumstances of their death.
■ Example: A victim who has been fatally wounded tells a bystander that
the defendant was the one who shot them. (USUALLY NOT APPLICABLE
FOR ESTAFA)
○ Declaration against interest - A statement that would naturally subject the
declarant to liability, and is so far contrary to their own interest, that a reasonable
man would not have made the statement unless they believed it to be true.
■ Example: The prosecution presents a witness who testifies that he
overheard the accused saying to a co-conspirator that he knew the funds
he received were obtained through illegal means. The witness is a former
business partner of the accused who had a falling out and is now
testifying against him. The statement is against the accused's interest
because it tends to incriminate him in the crime of estafa.
○ Act or declaration about pedigree - The declaration of a person deceased, or
unable to testify due to physical or mental incapacity, relating to the pedigree of
another person related to the declarant by birth or marriage.
■ Example: In an estafa case would be if the prosecution presents a written
statement from the deceased victim's father identifying the victim as his
son and stating his date of birth, which is relevant in establishing the
victim's identity and the relationship between the victim and the accused
in a case of estafa.
○ Family reputation or tradition - Evidence of family reputation or tradition
respecting pedigree.
■ Example: The witness testifies that the complainant's family has been
known for such activities for several generations, and that it is widely
believed that they use their real estate business as a front for their
fraudulent activities.
○ Common reputation - Evidence of common reputation existing previous to the
controversy, respecting facts of public or general interest more than 30 years old.
■ Example: In an estafa case where the accused is accused of falsifying
documents related to a property sale, the prosecution may present
evidence of the property's ownership and history in the community.
Long-term residents' testimony, documents such as old maps or tax
records, and other evidence that establishes a pattern of public
knowledge and belief about the property may be considered.
○ Part of the res gestae - Statements made by a person while a startling
occurrence is taking place or immediately prior or after the occurrence, and is
made under such circumstances as to guarantee its trustworthiness.
■ Example: A victim's statement made immediately after discovering the
fraudulent transaction, such as "I can't believe this happened! I trusted
him with my money and he stole it!"
○ Entries in the course of business - Entries made in the course of business, or
professional activity, at or about the time of the transaction or occurrence.
■ Example: In an estafa case, the prosecution may exhibit the accused's
business establishment's ledger book, which details the transactions
between the accused and the victim. The entries in the ledger book were
made by the accountant of the business establishment at or near the time
of the transactions.
○ Entries in official records - Entries in official records made in the performance of a
duty by a public officer.
■ Example: Marriage certificates, death certificates, and other official
records kept by government offices.
○ Entries in ancient documents - Entries in public or private documents more than
30 years old.
■ Example: The prosecution presents an old land registry document that
shows the original ownership of the land in question in an estafa case
filed against a person accused of falsifying documents. The document,
which dates back more than 30 years, was discovered in a government
archive. According to the prosecution, the document proves that the
accused had no legal right to transfer the land to another party and that
their actions constituted estafa.
○ Records of religious organizations - Statements of birth, marriage, divorce, or
death contained in the registers of births, marriages, divorces, or deaths kept by
religious organizations.
■ Example: A baptismal record of a person that is used to prove their age or
identity.
○ Learned treatises - Excerpts from books or publications on a subject of history,
science, or art, established as a reliable authority by the testimony of the author
or other expert witness.
■ Example: Prosecution in an estafa case may present accounting
principles to establish standard practices and procedures in handling
financial transitions. This then may support or contradict the claim of the
defense.
○ Testimony or deposition at a former proceeding - Testimony or deposition taken in
another proceeding or in a different case, involving the same parties and subject
matter.
■ Example: The other victims of the accused, who was involved in the same
manner can testify.
○ Opinion of an expert witness - Opinion of an expert witness relating to scientific,
technical or other specialized knowledge.
■ Example: In an estafa case that involves fake currency, the expert witness
can explain the specific characteristics of a legitimate currency as an
opinion.
21. Difference between Admission and Confession
- An admission is a statement that does not necessarily admit guilt but rather
acknowledges a fact relevant to the case or crime. On the other hand, a confession is an
admission of guilt or responsibility for an offense.
22. Requisites for Valid Extra-Judicial Confession:
● It must be voluntary
● It must be made with the assistance of a competent and independent counsel
● It must be made in writing or recorded
● It must be signed or thumbmarked by the accused
● It must be given in the presence of a competent and independent witness
23. Rules on Offer of compromise and example
- It is a written or oral communication made by a party to another, proposing to settle a
claim or a dispute between them. It can be made at any time, even before a case is filed
in court. For example, the accused offers to settle the case with the complainant for a
certain amount of money. The plaintiff rejects the offer and decides to take the case to
court.
24. What are the rules on Opinion of a witness?
- Opinion of a witness is not admissible as evidence but exceptions are:
- The witness is an expert on a particular subject matter
- The opinion is based on the personal knowledge or perception of the witness
- The opinion is necessary to explain or clarify a fact
25. What are the rules on character of a witness?
- No matter how good or bad a witness is, their statement is still not admissible except
under the following exceptions:
- The witness's character is a material fact in the case - if the case involves a
charge of defamation, evidence of the plaintiff's reputation for dishonesty may be
admissible
- The witness's character has been attacked - If a party has attacked the character
of a witness, evidence of the witness's good character may be admissible to
rebut the attack.
- The witness is an accused in a criminal case - In a criminal case, evidence of the
character of the accused may be admissible to show that he or she is more or
less likely to have committed the crime charged.
27. Who has the burden of proof in criminal cases?
- To have burden of proof, the prosecution must present evidence that is sufficient to
convince the judge or jury that the accused committed the crime charged.
28. Rules on examination of witness
- To ensure that the testimony is reliable and relevant, the following rules are followed:
- Direct examination: The party who called the witness conducts the direct
examination, which involves asking open-ended questions. An example is
that The prosecution calls a witness who claims to have witnessed the
accused receiving money from the victim under false pretenses in an
estafa case. The prosecutor conducts the direct examination and asks
open-ended questions, such as "What did you see?" or "Can you
describe the accused's actions?"
- Cross-examination: The opposing party has the right to cross-examine
the witness after the direct examination. The defense has the right to
cross-examine the witness after the direct examination. The defense
attorney can ask questions to clarify or challenge the witness's testimony,
such as "Were you wearing glasses at the time?" or "How far away were
you from the accused?"
- Impeachment: Witnesses may be impeached by evidence showing bias
29. Rights and obligations of a witness
Their rights include:
- A witness is required to answer all questions that are posed to him. He cannot select
which questions to answer and which to ignore.
- The witness has the right to be protected from tactics intended to "browbeat, badger,
insult, intimidate, or harass" him by the opposing party.
- He has the right to be detained for no longer than is required.
- He may refuse to answer the questions below.
a) Those that are irrelevant to the issue
b) Self-incriminating statements, except in the following instances:
- (i) where the accused is testifying as a witness on his own
behalf, as to questions relating only to the offense about
which he is testifying;
- (ii) where the witness has been granted immunity from
prosecution, such as when he is under the Witness
Protection Program or was discharged to be used as a
state witness, or he is a government witness in Anti-Graft
Cases.
c). Those that are self-degrading, unless they are intended to discredit the
witness by casting doubt on his moral character.
30. What is the order of examination of witness?
a. Direct examination
b. Cross-examination
c. Re-direct examination
d. Re-cross examination
31. What is direct examination?
- It is the questioning of a witness by the party who called him or her to testify. During
direct examination, the party's attorney asks the witness open-ended questions to elicit a
complete account of the relevant events or issues. In a case involving an alleged
fraudulent transaction, the prosecutor may call a witness who can testify to the details of
the transaction. The prosecutor may ask the witness questions such as: “Did the
defendant return the money as promised?” “Did the defendant approach you about a
potential investment opportunity?”
32. What is cross-examination?
- It is the questioning of a witness by the attorney for the opposing party after the direct
examination. During cross-examination, the opposing attorney asks questions designed
to challenge or discredit the witness's testimony, or to elicit additional information that
may support the case of the opposing party. For example, in an estafa case, the
prosecutor may call a witness who claims to have witnessed the accused taking money
from the victim's bank account without permission. During cross-examination, the
defense counsel may question the witness about their relationship with the victim, any
biases they may have, and their ability to see clearly what was happening. The defense
counsel may also question the witness about any prior inconsistent statements or
discrepancies in their testimony.
33. What is redirect examination
- It is the questioning of a witness by the party that called the witness to testify, following
the conclusion of cross-examination. Redirect examination seeks to clarify or explain any
issues raised during cross-examination and to reestablish the witness's credibility or
testimony. In an estafa case, the prosecution can ask the witness to clarify or reiterate
the terms of the agreement and provide any additional details that may have been
missed during the cross-examination. The prosecution can also attempt to correct any
inconsistencies that were raised by the defense.
34. What is recross-examination?
- It is an additional opportunity for the opposing party to question the witness following the
conclusion of the redirect examination. It permits the opposing party to further clarify or
challenge the witness' testimony during the redirect examination. For example, if during
redirect examination the witness contradicted their earlier testimony, the opposing party
may use recross-examination to point out these inconsistencies and further undermine
the credibility of the witness.
35. What are the Leading questions?
- Leading questions are intended to influence or control the witness's answers. These are
questions that either hint at the desired answer or lead the witness to a specific
response. These questions are usually closed-ended and contain assumptions or
presuppositions.
36. What are MISLEADING QUESTIONS?
- Misleading questions are designed to affect a witness's answer by suggesting a
response or providing false information. These can be used to deceive the witness or
create a misleading impression in the judge or jury's mind. Some examples of leading
questions for estafa case are:
● “Isn't it true that you personally witnessed the defendant signing the contract in
question?”
● “You knew the defendant to be dishonest, isn't that correct?”
● “The defendant never intended to pay back the loan, did they?”
37. What is AUTHENTICATION OF evidence?
- For an evidence, such as a document or object, to be acceptable in court, its
genuineness and validity must be established. This process involves presenting
evidence to demonstrate that the document or object is authentic and has not been
tampered with or altered. In an estafa case, the evidence presented by the prosecution
is a written agreement between the accused and the victim. The prosecution would have
to provide evidence that the document is genuine and not a forgery. This could include
witness testimony attesting to the document's authenticity or expert examination to
determine whether it has been tampered with.
38. What is the Weight of Evidence in Civil Cases?
- Preponderance of evidence
39. What is Preponderance of evidence?
- It indicates that the evidence offered by one side is more convincing, persuasive, and
likely than the evidence presented by the opposing side. In other words, if one party
offered more convincing evidence than the other, the judge should rule in favor of the
party who presented the most convincing evidence.
40. What is the Weight of Evidence in Criminal Cases?
- Proof beyond reasonable doubt
41. What is Proof beyond reasonable doubt?
- That means that the proof must be so conclusive that there is no reasonable doubt that
the accused is guilty. The prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and
if insufficient evidence is given to reach this standard, the accused must be acquitted.
42. What is the Weight of Evidence in Administrative Case?
- Substantial evidence
43. What is Substantial evidence?
- It is the quantity of significant evidence that a reasonable mind would accept as sufficient
to support a judgment.
44. When to make an offer of evidence in Object, documentary, and testimonial evidence?
- The general rule is that an offer of evidence must be made at the time the evidence is
formally offered during the trial. Here are specific rules for each type:
In relation to the estafa case:
■ Object evidence: When presenting object evidence, such as a forged
document, it is often provided to the court when it is introduced.
■ Documentary evidence: When presenting documentary evidence, such
as bank statements or contracts, it must be presented formally during the
trial by the witness who can authenticate the document.
■ Testimonial evidence: the offer of evidence may be made after the
witness has testified and the opposing counsel has completed
cross-examination.
45. When to raise an objection in Object, documentary, and testimonial evidence?
- During the presentation of object, documentary, or testimonial evidence, an objection
may be raised if the evidence is inadmissible or otherwise unacceptable.
- There are instances when objection can be specifically made:
- Object Evidence - when the document is irrelevant, when it is not the best
evidence, or when it is not properly authenticated or identified.
- Documentary Evidence - when the document is irrelevant, when it is not the
best evidence, or when it is not properly authenticated or identified.
- Testimonial Evidence - when the testimony is hearsay, the witness is not
qualified to testify, the testimony is based on a privileged communication, the
question is leading or misleading, or the testimony is unresponsive to the
question.
46. Difference between direct and circumstantial evidence.
- Direct evidence is evidence that proves a fact directly, without inference or assumption. It
is evidence that is based on the witness's personal knowledge or observation, and it
might take the form of testimony or physical proof. Circumstantial evidence, on the other
hand, is evidence that does not explicitly prove a fact but instead relies on inferences or
assumptions drawn from other facts. It is evidence that requires a line of reasoning to
reach a conclusion. The difference between them is that direct evidence provides direct
proof of a fact, whereas circumstantial evidence requires an inference or presumption to
establish a fact. In an estafa case where the defendant is accused of falsifying a
document to obtain a loan, direct evidence would be a witness who personally saw the
defendant forging the document. Circumstantial evidence, on the other hand, may
include evidence that the defendant had access to the materials used to forge the
document, that the defendant was the only one who could have gained from the forgery,
or that the signature on the document does not match the known signature of the
supposed signatory.
47. Difference between positive and negative evidence.
- Positive evidence is evidence that directly establishes a fact, whereas negative evidence
is evidence that shows that a fact does not exist. Positive evidence is that the existence
of a fact is supported by evidence demonstrating its occurrence. In contrast, negative
evidence is the absence of evidence that would be expected if a fact were true. Negative
evidence cannot prove the absence of a fact conclusively; it can only imply its absence.
In an estafa case, positive evidence could be a witness testimony or a document that
directly shows the defendant's fraudulent act, such as a forged signature on a check.
Negative evidence could be the absence of any documentation or witnesses indicating
the existence of a supposed business transaction, which could suggest that the
transaction was fictitious and used as a basis for the estafa charge.
