International School of Asia and the Pacific 1

Subject: Criminal Evidence

Review Notes in
CRIMINAL EVIDENCE

EVIDENCE COMPARED

EVIDENCE - It is the means, sanctioned by the Rules

of Court, of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the
truth respecting a matter of fact.

Classifications:

1. OBJECT Directly addressed to the senses of

the court [Rule 130, Sec. 1]. Referred to as real
evidence or evidence by autoptic preference.
2. DOCUMENTARY Consist of writing or any
material
containing
modes
of
written
expression (i.e. words, numbers, figures,
symbols) offered as proof of their contents.
[Rule 130, Sec. 2]
3. TESTIMONIAL Submitted to the court
through the testimony or deposition of a
witness.
Other Classifications:
1. DIRECT Proves the fact in dispute without
aid of any inference or presumption.
2. CIRCUMSTANTIAL Proof of fact/s from
which, taken singly/collectively, the existence of
the particular fact in dispute may be inferred as
a necessary/probable consequence. It is
evidence of relevant collateral facts.
3. CUMULATIVE Evidence of the same kind
and to the same state of facts.
4. CORROBORATIVE Additional evidence of a
different character to the same point.
5. PRIMA FACIE That which, standing alone is
sufficient to maintain the proposition affirmed.
6. CONCLUSIVE That class of evidence which
the law does not allow to be contradicted.
7. PRIMARY (Best evidence) The law regards
these as affording the greatest certainty of the
fact in question.
8. SECONDARY (Substitutionary evidence)
Permitted by law only when the best evidence
is unavailable.
9. POSITIVE When a witness affirms that a fact
did or did not occur (there is personal
knowledge).
10. NEGATIVE When witness states that he did
not see or know of the occurrence of a fact

aries gallandez_12

PROOF It is the result or effect of evidence;

when the requisite quantum of evidence of a
particular fact has been duly admitted and given
weight, the result is called the proof of such fact.
FACTUM PROBANDUM The ultimate fact or
the fact sought to be established. It refers to the
proposition (e.g. victim was stabbed).
FACTUM PROBANS The evidentiary fact or
the fact by which the factum probandum is to be
established; refers to the materials that establish
the proposition (e.g. bloody knife).
Terms to know:
a. Irrelevant evidence - offered piece of
evidence has no probative value
b. Inadmissible evidence - offered evidence is
excluded by some rule of evidence
c. Incompetent evidence - offered evidence is
not qualified under the rules of testimonial
evidence
d. Immaterial evidence the offered evidential
fact is directed to prove some probandum
which is not proper in issue. The rule of
substantive law and of pleading are what
determines immateriality
e. Conditional Admissibility evidence is
admissible only in dependence upon other
facts. It is received on the express assurance
of counsel, when objection is manifested,
that other facts will be duly presented at a
suitable opportunity before the case is
closed.
f. Multiple Admissibility - When a fact is offered
for one purpose, and is admissible in so far
as it satisfies all rules applicable to it when
offered for that purpose, its failure to satisfy
some other rule which would be applicable to
it offered for another purpose does not
exclude it.

INSTANCES WHEN PROOF CAN BE DISPENSED

WITH
1. Res ipsa loquitur
2. Presumptions
3. Judicial notice
4. Judicial admissions

#GOBACKTOBASIC

Saint Marys University_Criminology Review Center 2

Subject: Criminal Evidence

Kinds of presumptions:
1. Conclusive - which the law does not allow to
be controverted
2. Disputable - which are satisfactory if
uncontradicted, but which may be contradicted
and overcome by other evidence
JUDICIAL NOTICE cognizance of certain facts by
the court w/o proof because they are facts, which, by
common experience, are of universal knowledge
among intelligent persons w/in a country or
community
Requisites:
1. matter of common knowledge
2. well & authoritatively settled and not doubted
or uncertain
3. known to be w/in the limits of jurisdiction of the
court
Judicial Admission admission, verbal or written,
made by a party in the course of the proceedings in
the same case; does not require proof.
RULES OF ADMISSIBILITY
OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE that which is
addressed directly to the sense of the court without
the intervention of a witness, as by actual sight,
hearing, taste, smell or touch.
A.K.A autoptic
proference.
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE documents as
evidence consist of writings or any material
containing letters, words, numbers, figures, symbols
or other modes of written expressions offered as
proof of their contents
Original of a document
a. the contents of which are the subject of the
inquiry
b. when a document is in two or more copies
executed at or about the same time with
identical contents
c. when an entry is repeated in the regular
course of the business

Exceptions to the rule that only original

documents may be admissible:
a. when the original has been lost or destroyed
b. when the original is in the custody or control
of the party against whom it is offered, and
the latter fails to produce it
c. when the original is a public record in the
custody of a public officer or is recorded in a
public office
d. when the original consists of numerous
accounts or cannot be examined by the
court without great loss of time
BEST EVIDENCE RULE
a. only original of the document is admissible.
b. Merely assures presentation of the original
document and bars non-original documents,
etc.. BUT not evidence aliunde or parol
evidence
c. Refers only to the factum probandum but not
to the interpretation of the document.
d. Original must be presented first before
evidence aliunde may be presented
SECONDARY EVIDENCE that which shows that
better or primary evidence exists as to the proof of
the fact in question.
It is that class of evidence which is relevant to
the fact in issue, it being first shown that the
primary evidence of the fact is not obtainable
When Secondary Evidence is Admissible
a. original has been lost or destroyed
b. prove the existence or execution of the
original
c. prove the cause of the unavailability of the
original, is not due to the bad faith of the
offeror.
PAROL EVIDENCE RULE (ORAL) Forbids any
addition to or contradiction of the terms of a written
instrument by testimony purporting to show that, at
or before the signing, of the document, other or
different terms were orally agreed upon by the
parties
Exceptions to the Parol Evidence Rule (must be
alleged in the pleadings) [F-I-V-E]
a. Failure of the written agreement to express
the true intent & agreement of the parties
b. Intrinsic ambiguity
c. Validity of the written agreement

Saint Marys University_Criminology Review Center 3

Subject: Criminal Evidence
d. Existence of other terms agreed to by the
parties
To justify the reformation of a written instrument
upon the ground of mistake, the concurrence of
three things is necessary:
a. mistake should be one of fact
b. mistake should be mutual or common to
both parties to the instrument
c. mistake should be alleged and proved by
clear and convincing evidence

Two kinds of ambiguities:

a. patent (extrinsic) where the instrument on its
face is unintelligible
b. latent (intrinsic) where the words of the
instrument are clear but their application to
the circumstances is doubtful
N.B.: the rule permits parol evidence to
explain an intrinsic ambiguity
CLASSES OF DOCUMENTS:
1. PUBLIC, consisting of:

the written official acts, or records of the

official acts of the sovereign authority, official
bodies and tribunals, and public officers,
whether of the Philippines, or of a foreign
country;
Documents acknowledged before a notary
public, except last wills and testaments; and
Note: Notarial documents may be presented in
evidence without further proof. The certificate of
acknowledgement is prima facie evidence of the
execution of the instrument or document
involved.

Public records, kept in the Philippines, of

private documents required by law to be
entered therein.

Note: These documents may be proved by: (a)

the original record, or (b) a copy thereof attested
by the legal custodian of the record, with an
appropriate certificate that such officer has the
custody.
2. PRIVATE, consisting of all other writings.

Note: Before any private document offered as

authentic is received in evidence, its due
execution and authenticity must be proved either
by:
Anyone who saw the document executed or
written; or
Evidence of the genuineness of the
signature or handwriting of the maker.
Any other private document need only be
identified as that which it is claimed to be.
A judicial record may be impeached by evidence
of:
a. Want of jurisdiction in the court or
judicial officer;
b. Collusion between the parties; or
c. Fraud in the party offering the record, in
respect to the proceedings
Documents that do not need to be authenticated:
a. Public documents;
b. Notarial documents;
c. Ancient documents
Ancient Document Rule - Where a private
document is:
a. more than 30 years old,
b. is produced from a custody in which it
would naturally be found if genuine, and
c. is unblemished by any alterations or
circumstances of suspicion
d. no other evidence of its authenticity
need be given. (Rule 132, Sec. 21)
In what Instances must alterations in documents
be accounted for by the producing party?
a. The document being produced as
genuine has been altered;
b. The alteration appears to have been
done after the execution of the
document;
c. The alteration appears to have been in a
part material to the question in dispute.
What explanations are satisfactory so as to make
the altered document admissible in evidence?
The producing party must show that the
alteration was:
a. made by another;
b. made without his (the producing partys)
concurrence;
c. made with the consent of the parties
affected by it;

Saint Marys University_Criminology Review Center 4

Subject: Criminal Evidence
d. otherwise properly or innocently made;
or
e. such that it did not change the meaning
or language of the instrument.
INTERPRETATION OF DOCUMENTS:

CONSTRUCTION is the process or the art of

determining the sense, real meaning, or proper
explanation of obscure or ambiguous terms or
provisions in a statute, written instrument or oral
agreement, or the application of such subject to
the case in question
INTERPRETATION is the art or process of
discovering and expounding the meaning of a
statute, will, contract or other written document
Rules in the interpretation of documents:
1. legal meaning the writing bears in the place
of its execution;
2. all provisions must be given effect;
3. intention of the parties must be pursued;
4. a particular intent will control a general intent
inconsistent with it;
5. circumstances of execution may be shown;
6. terms are presumed to have been used in
their primary and general acceptation; but
evidence is admissible to show an otherwise
peculiar signification;
7. written words control printed;
8. experts & interpreters can be used to explain
characters difficult to be deciphered or
language not understood by the court;
9. when terms were intended in different
senses, that sense is to prevail against
either party in which he supposed the other
understood it;
10. when different constructions are otherwise
equally proper, the one most favorable to the
party in whose favor the provision was made
will be taken;
11. construction in favor of natural right;
12. instrument may be construed according to
usage

TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE
GENERAL RULE: The following are not grounds
for disqualification:
1. Religious belief;
2. Political belief;
3. Interest in the outcome of the case; and
4. Conviction of a crime

EXCEPTION: When provided for by law.

1. Grounds for disqualification enumerated
in the Rules on Evidence:
2. Disqualification by reason of:
3. Mental incapacity
4. Immaturity
5. Marriage
6. Death or insanity of adverse party
7. Privileged communication
PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATIONS
1. Marital Confidential communication
Requisites:
a. spouses are legally married
b. privilege is claims with regard to a
communication, oral or written, made during
the marriage
c. said communication was made confidentially
d. action or proceeding where the privilege is
claimed is not by one against the other
2. Attorney-Client Privileged Communication
Requisites:
a. legal advice of any kind is sought
b. from a professional legal adviser in his
capacity as such
c. the communications relating to that purpose
d. made in confidence
e. by the client
f. are at his instance permanently protected
g. from disclosure by himself or by the legal
adviser
h. except that the protection may be waived
3. Physicians and clients
Requisites:
a. civil case
b. person against whom the privilege is
claimed is one duly authorized to practice
medicine, surgery or obstetrics
c. such information was acquired while he was
attending to the patient in his professional
capacity
d. the information was necessary to enable him
to act in that capacity, and if disclosed, shall
blacken the reputation of the patient
4. Priest and penitent
Requisites:
a. clergyman or priest and a penitent
b. confession of a penitential character
c. made to the priest in his professional
character

Saint Marys University_Criminology Review Center 5

Subject: Criminal Evidence
d. confession is sanctioned by the church to
which the priest or religious officer belongs
5. Public officers
Requisites:
a. confidential communication
b. made to or obtained by a public officer
c. obtained in the exercise of his public
function
d. disclosure of the communication would be
detrimental to the public interest
6. Parental and Filial privilege - No person may
be compelled to testify against his parents, other
direct ascendants, children, or other direct
descendants.
Notes:
This provision does not apply to spouses.
This provision means that you may testify if
you want, but you may not be compelled to
testify.
This provision is subject to the qualification
in Sec. 215 of the Family Code, i.e. a
descendant may be compelled to testify
against parents and grandparents IF the
testimony is indispensable in a crime against
the descendant or by one parent against the
other.

Self-serving declaration - a declaration

wherein:
a. the testimony is favorable to the
declarant;
b. it is made extrajudicially; and
c. it is made in anticipation of litigation.
Note: Self-serving
admissible.

ADMISSION - It is an act, declaration or omission as

to a relevant fact. It may be given by a party (in
which case Rule 130, Sec. 26 will be applicable) or
by a third-party.
General Rule: Confessions of a defendant made
to witnesses are admissible against him, but are
inadmissible against his co-defendant
Exception:
confessions on the stand
confessions not objected to
adopted confession
identical confession
corroborated confession
confession by conspirator (after conspiracy
has been shown & proven)

are

not

Requisites for the admissibility of an

admission:
a. must involve matters of fact and not of law;
b. must be categorical and definite;
c. must be knowingly and voluntarily made;
d. must be adverse to the admitters interest
CONFESSION - It is the declaration of an accused
acknowledging his guilt of the offense charged, or of
any offense necessarily included therein.
ADMISSION & CONFESSION DISTINGUISED
Definition

Form

ADMISSIONS AND CONFESSIONS

declarations

Made by
Cases in
which
applicable

Admission
Statement of fact
which
does
not
involve
an
acknowledgement of
guilt or liability
May be express or
tacit
Party or 3rd person
Both criminal and civil
cases

Confession
Declaration
acknowledging
ones guilt of the
offense charged
Must be express
Party himself
Usually criminal
cases

Differentiate an admission and confession in

criminal cases.
Definition

Sufficien
cy
to
authorize
a
convictio
n

Admission
Statement
by
the
accused,
direct
or
implied,
of
facts
pertinent to the issue
and
tending,
in
connection with proof
of other facts, to prove
his guilt
Insufficient. Tends only
to
establish
the
ultimate fact of guilt.

Confession
Acknowledgm
ent in express
terms by a
party in
a
criminal case
of his guilt of
the
crime
charged
Sufficient

Saint Marys University_Criminology Review Center 6

Subject: Criminal Evidence
Differentiate the effects of judicial and
extrajudicial confessions.
A judicial confession is sufficient in itself to
sustain a conviction, even in capital offenses.
On the other hand, an extrajudicial confession
is insufficient in itself to sustain a conviction. It
must be corroborated by evidence of the corpus
delicti
Requisites
for
the
extrajudicial confessions?

admissibility

of

a. Must involve an express and categorical

acknowledgment of guilt (US v. Corales);
b. The facts admitted must be constitutive of a
criminal offense (US v. Flores);
c. Must have been given voluntarily (People v.
Nishishima);
d. Must have been made intelligently (Bilaan v.
Cusi)
e. Must have been made with the assistance of
competent and independent counsel (Art III,
Sec. 12, 1987 Constitution)
Rules governing extrajudicial confessions:
GENERAL RULE: The extrajudicial confession of
an accused is binding only upon himself and is
not admissible against his co-accused.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. Interlocking confessions, i.e. extrajudicial
confessions independently made without
collusion which are identical with each other
in their material respects and confirmatory of
the other (People v. Encipido);
2. If the co-accused impliedly acquiesced in or
adopted said confession by not questioning
its truthfulness (People v. Orenciada);
3. Where the accused admitted the facts stated
by the confessant after being apprised of
such confession (People v. Narciso);
4. If the accused are charged as coconspirators of the crime which was
confessed by one of the accused and said
confession is used only as corroborative
evidence (People v. Linde);
5. Where the confession is used as
circumstantial evidence to show the
probability of participation by the coconspirator (People v. Condemena);

6. Where the confessant testified for his codefendant (People v. Villanueva);

7. Where the co-conspirators extrajudicial
confession is corroborated by other
evidence of record (People v. Paz)
Rules on offer of compromise
Civil cases:
Not admission of liability;
not admissible in evidence against offeror
Criminal cases: Admissible against accused as
implied admission of guilt
Exceptions:
Quasi-offenses (criminal negligence)
Those offenses allowed by law to be
compromised (e.g., Sec. 204, NIRC of
1977)
The following are not admissions of liability or
guilt and are therefore not admissible in evidence:
a. Plea of guilty later withdrawn;
b. Unaccepted offer of plea of guilty to a lesser
offense;
c. Offer to pay or payment of medical, hospital
or other expenses occasioned by an injury
RES INTER ALIOS ACTA RULE - the rights of a
party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration or
omission of another (i.e. a non-party), except in the
following instances:
1. by partner, agent or other person jointly
interested with the party
Requisites:
a. the partnership, agency or joint interest
is proven by evidence other than the act
or declaration sought to be admitted
b. the admission is within the scope of the
partnership, agency or joint interest
c. admission was made while the agency,
pship or joint interest was in existence
2. by conspirator
Requisites:
a. conspiracy is first proved by evidence
other than the admission itself
b. admission relates to the common object
c. that it has been made while the
declarant was engaged in carrying out
the conspiracy
3. by privies
Requisites:

Saint Marys University_Criminology Review Center 7

Subject: Criminal Evidence
a. Relation of privity between party and
declarant;
b. Admission was made by the declarant
as predecessor-in-interest, while holding
title to the property;
c. The admission was in relation to said
property.
Requisites for admission by silence:
a. Hearing and understanding of the
statement by the party;
b. Opportunity and necessity of denying
the statements;
c. Statement must refer to a matter
affecting his right;
d. Facts were within the knowledge of the
party;
e. Facts admitted or the inference to be
drawn from his silence would be material
to the issue (Regalado)
HEARSAY EVIDENCE RULE - A witness can testify
only to those facts which he knows of his personal
knowledge.
Independently relevant statement - It is a
statement whose probative value is independent
of its truth or falsity. The mere fact of its
utterance is relevant,
Two kinds of independently relevant statements:
1. Statements which are the very facts in issue;
2. Statements
which
are
circumstantial
evidence of the facts in issue (Francisco)
Reasons for Excluding Hearsay:
1. irresponsibility of the original declarant
2. depreciation of truth in the process of
repetition
3. opportunities for fraud would open
4. tendency of such evidence to protect legal
inquiries, and encourage the substitution of
weaker for stronger proofs.

the accused, the cause & circumstances

of the killing
d. declarant would be competent to testify
had he survived any case wherein the
subject is his death.
2. Declaration against interest
Requisites:
a. declarant would not be available to
testify (dead, mentally incapacitated
incompetent etc..)
b. declaration must concern a fact
cognizable by declarant
c. circumstances must render it improbable
that a motive to falsify existed
3. Act or declaration against pedigree
Requisites:
a. declarant is dead or unable to testify
b. pedigree must be in issue
c. declarant must be a relative of the
person whose pedigree is in question
d. declaration must be made before the
controversy occurred ante-litem
motam
4. Family reputation or tradition regarding
pedigree
Requisites:
a. tradition or reputation is one existing in
the family
b. reputation or tradition was formed antelitem motam
c. witness testifying to the reputation or
tradition is a member of the family
5. Common reputation
Requisites:
a. that the matter to which the reputation
refers to is of public or general interest
and more than 30 years old
b. that the reputation is one formed in the
community interested
c. it existed ante litem motam

Exceptions to Hearsay Rule

1. Dying declaration
Requisites:
a. death is imminent
b. declarant is conscious of his impending
death
c. declaration refers to material facts which
concern the identity of the deceased or

6. Part of the res gestae

a. spontaneous exclamations
Requisites:
the principal fact, the res gestae,
must be a startling occurrence
statements must have been made
before the declarant had time to
contrive or devise

Saint Marys University_Criminology Review Center 8

Subject: Criminal Evidence

statements must concern the

occurrence in question and its
immediately
attending
circumstances
b. Contemporaneous statements or verbal
acts
Requisites:
conduct characterized by the words
must be independently material to
the issue
conduct must be equivocal
words must aid in giving legal
significance to the conduct
words must accompany the conduct
Spontaneous
exclamations
Res gestae is the
startling occurrence
Exclamation may be prior
to, simultaneous with or
subsequent
to
the
startling occurrence

Contemporaneous or
verbal act
Res gestae is the
equivocal act
Verbal act must be
contemporaneous with
or must accompany
the equivocal act

7. Entries in the course of business

Requisites:
a. entrant made the entries in his
professional capacity or in the
performance of a duty
b. entrant is dead, outside of the Phils. or
unable to testify
c. entries were made in the ordinary
course of business or duty
d. entries were made at or near the time of
the transaction to which it relates
e. entrant was in a position to know the
facts stated in the entry
f. there must be more than one entry
8. Entries in official records
Requisites:
a. entry was made by a public officer or by
another person specially enjoined by law
to do so
b. made in the performance of his duties or
by another person in the performance of
a duty specially enjoined by law
c. the public officer or the other person had
sufficient knowledge of the facts by him
stated, acquired by him either personally
or thru official channels connected with
the exercise of his public functions

9. Commercial lists and the like

10. Learned treatises
11. Testimony or deposition at a former
proceeding
Requisites:
a. testimony was rendered in a former case
b. identity of parties
c. identity of subject matter
d. adverse party had opportunity to crossexamine the witness
e. witness is dead, outside of the Phils., pr
unable to testify in the subsequent trial
THE OPINION RULE The opinion of a witness is
not admissible, except in the following cases:
1. On a matter requiring special knowledge,
skill, experience or training which he
possesses, that is, when he is an expert
thereon;
2. Regarding the identity or the handwriting of
a person, when he has knowledge of the
person or handwriting, whether he is an
ordinary or expert witness;
3. On the mental sanity of a person, if the
witness is sufficiently acquainted with the
former or if the latter is an expert witness;
4. On the emotion, behavior, condition or
appearance of a person which he has
observed; and
5. On ordinary matters known to all men of
common perception, such as the value of
ordinary household articles (Galian v. State
Assurance Co., Ltd.)
RULES ON CHARACTER EVIDENCE
GENERAL RULE: Not admissible.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. In criminal cases:
a. Accused may prove his good moral
character which is pertinent to the moral
trait involved in the offense charged.
b. Prosecution may only prove accuseds
bad moral character pertinent to the
moral trait involved in the offense
charged during rebuttal.
c. The good or bad moral character of the
offended party may be proved if it tends
to establish in any reasonable degree
the probability or improbability of the
offense charged.

Saint Marys University_Criminology Review Center 9

Subject: Criminal Evidence
2. In civil cases Evidence of the moral
character of a party is admissible only when
pertinent to the issue of character involved in
the case.
3. Evidence of a witness good moral character
is admissible only once such character has
been impeached.
Burden of Proof and Presumptions:
1. matters which need not be proved by a party
to an action are:
2. allegations contained in the complaint or
answer immaterial to the issues
3. facts which are admitted or which are not
denied in the answer, provided they have
been sufficiently alleged
4. those which are the subject of an agreed
statement of facts between parties, as well
as those admitted by the party in the course
of the proceedings in the same case
5. those subject to judicial notice
6. facts which are legally presumed
7. facts peculiarly w/in the knowledge of the
opposite party
What are the
witnesses?

rules

on

impeachment

of

GENERAL RULE: The party producing a witness is

not allowed to impeach his credibility.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. Unwilling or hostile witness A witness
may be considered as unwilling or hostile
only if so declared by the court upon
adequate showing of:
a. his adverse interest,
b. unjustified reluctance to testify; or
c. his having misled the party into calling
him to the witness stand. (Rule 132,
Sec. 12)
2. Witness who is an adverse party
3. Officer, director, or managing agent of a
public or private corporation or of a
partnership or association which is an
adverse party.
In these instances, such witnesses
may be impeached by the party presenting
him in all respects as if he had been called
by the adverse party, except by evidence of
his bad character.

How may an adverse partys witness be

impeached?
1. By contradictory evidence;
2. By evidence that his general reputation for
truth, honesty, or integrity is bad;
3. By evidence that he has made at other times
statements inconsistent with his present
testimony
(a.k.a.
prior
inconsistent
statements)
LAYING THE PREDICATE 1. Confronting the witness with the prior
inconsistent
statements
with
the
circumstances under which they were made;
2. Asking him whether he made such
statements; and
3. Giving him a chance to explain the
inconsistency. (Rule 132, Sec. 13)
A witness may not be impeached by evidence of
particular wrongful acts. Except that it may be
shown by the examination of the witness, or the
record of the judgment, that he has been
convicted of an offense.
LEADING QUESTION - It is a question which
suggests to the witness the answer which the
examining party desires.
It is not allowed,
except:
1. On cross-examination;
2. On preliminary matters;
3. When there is difficulty is getting direct and
intelligible answers from a witness who is
ignorant, or a child of tender years, or is of
feeble-mind, or a deaf-mute
4. Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or
5. Of a witness who is an adverse party or an
officer, director, or managing agent of a
public or private corporation or of a
partnership or association which is an
adverse party
MISLEADING QUESTION - A misleading question is
one which assumes as true a fact not yet testified to
by the witness, or contrary to that which he has
previously stated. It is not allowed.
What are the rights of a witness?
1. To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or
insulting questions, and from harsh or
insulting demeanor;
2. Not to be detained longer than the interests
of justice require;

Saint Marys University_Criminology Review Center 10

Subject: Criminal Evidence
3. Not to be examined except only as to
matters pertinent to the issue;
4. Not to give an answer which will tend to
subject him to a penalty for an offense
unless otherwise provided by law; or
5. Not to give an answer which will tend to
degrade his reputation, unless it be to the
very fact at issue or to a fact from which the
fact in issue would be presumed. But a
witness must answer to the fact of his
previous final conviction for an offense.
Exceptions to the rule against repetition of
objections:
1. where the question has not been answered,
it is necessary to repeat the objection when
the evidence is again offered or the question
again asked
2. evidence of the same kind as that previously
admitted over objection
3. incompetency is shown later
4. objection refers to preliminary question it
must be repeated when the same question
is again asked during the introduction of
actual evidence
5. objection to evidence was sustained but
reoffered at a later stage of the trial
6. evidence is admitted on condition that its
competency or relevance be shown by
further evidence and the condition is not
fulfilled, the objection formerly interposed
must be repeated or a motion to strike out
the evidence must be made
7. where the court reserves the ruling on
objection, the objecting party must request a
ruling or repeat the objection
Distinction between presumption of innocence
and reasonable doubt
Presumption
of
Innocence
Conclusion drawn by
law in favor of
citizens
Evidence introduced
by
law
to
be
considered by the
court
OFFER AND OBJECTION

Reasonable Doubt
Condition of
mind
produced by proof
resulting
from
evidence in the case
Result of insufficient
proof

OFFER OF EVIDENCE The court shall consider

no evidence which has not been formally offered.
The purpose for which the evidence is offered must
be specified.
When to make offer:
Testimony of a witness - at the time the
witness is called to testify.
Documentary and object evidence - after the
presentation of a party's testimonial evidence.
Such offer shall be done orally unless allowed by
the court to be done in writing.
Objections:
Objection to evidence offered orally must be
made immediately after the offer is made.
Objection to a question propounded in the
course of the oral examination of a witness
shall be made as soon as the grounds
therefor shall become reasonably apparent.
An offer of evidence in writing shall be
objected to within three (3) days after notice
of the offer unless a different period is
allowed by the court.
The grounds for the objections must be
specified.
When repetition of objection unnecessary. When it becomes reasonably apparent in the
course of the examination that the questions
asked are of the same class as those to which
objection has been made (whether sustained or
overruled), it shall not be necessary to repeat the
objection, it being sufficient for the adverse party
to record his continuing objection to such class
of questions.
Striking out answer. - Should a witness answer
the question before the adverse party had the
opportunity to voice fully its objection to the
same, and such objection is found to be
meritorious, the court shall sustain the objection
and order the answer given to be stricken off the
record.
On motion, the court may also order the
striking out of answers which are incompetent,
irrelevant, or otherwise improper.
Tender of excluded evidence:
a. If documents or things offered are excluded
by the court, the offeror may have the same
attached to or made part of the record.
b. If the evidence excluded is oral, the offeror
may state for the record the name and other

Saint Marys University_Criminology Review Center 11

Subject: Criminal Evidence
personal circumstances of the witness and
the substance of the proposed testimony.
WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE
Quantum of Proofs
1. Preponderance of evidence (Civil Cases)- In
determining where the preponderance or
superior weight of evidence on the issues
involved lies, the court may consider all the facts
and circumstances of the case, the witnesses'
manner of testifying, their intelligence, their
means and opportunity of knowing the facts to
which they are testifying, the nature of the facts
to which they testify, the probability or
improbability of their testimony, their interest or
want of interest, and also their personal
credibility so far as the same may legitimately
appear upon the trial. The court may also
consider the number of witnesses, though the
preponderance is not necessarily with the
greater number.
2. Proof beyond reasonable doubt (Criminal
Cases) - does not mean such a degree of proof
as, excluding possibility of error, produces
absolute certainty. Moral certainty only is
required, or that degree of proof which produces
conviction in an unprejudiced mind.
An extrajudicial confession made by an accused,
shall not be sufficient ground for conviction -

unless corroborated by evidence of corpus

delicti.
Circumstantial evidence is sufficient for
conviction if:
There is more than one circumstance;
The facts from which the inferences are
derived are proven; and
The combination of all the circumstances' is
such as to produce a conviction beyond
reasonable doubt.
3. Substantial evidence (Administrative Cases) that amount of relevant evidence which a
reasonable mind might accept as adequate to
justify a conclusion.
Power of the court to stop further evidence. - The
court may stop the introduction of further testimony
upon any particular point when the evidence upon it
is already so full that more witnesses to the same
point cannot be reasonably expected to be
additionally persuasive. But this power should be
exercised with caution.
Evidence on motion. - When a motion is based on
facts not appearing of record the court may hear the
matter on affidavits or depositions presented by the
respective parties, but the court may direct that the
matter be heard wholly or partly on oral testimony or
depositions.
READ: RULES ON EVIDENCE by Willard Riano