FINALS REVIEWER on PRACTICE COURT
To keep out inadmissible
I. Lawyer’s Oath: I, ___, of ___, do
solemnly swear that I will maintain
allegiance to the Republic of the
Philippines; I will support its
Constitution and obey the laws as
well as the legal orders of the duly
constituted authorities therein; I will
do no falsehood, nor consent to the
doing of any in court; I will not
wittingly nor willingly promote or
sue any groundless, false or unlawful
suit, or give aid nor consent to the
same; I will delay no man for money
or malice, and will conduct myself as
a lawyer according to the best of my
knowledge and discretion, and with
all good fidelity as well to the court
as to my clients; and I impose upon
myself this voluntary obligation
without any mental reservation or
purpose of evasion. So help me God.
II. Exceptions to the hearsay rule:
a. Dying declaration
b. Declaration against interest
c. Act or declaration about pedigree
d. Family reputation or tradition
regarding pedigree
e. Common reputation
f. Part of the res gestae
g. Entries in the course of business
h. Entries in official records
i. Commercial lists and the like
j. Learned treatises
k. Testimony or deposition at a
former proceeding
III. Continuing objection: Rule 132,
Sec. 37 – When I becomes
reasonably apparent in the course of
the examination of a witness that the
question being propounded are of
the same class as those to which
objection has been made, whether
such objection was 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. (Put it in
record)
IV. Purposes of objections:
a.
evidence that would cause harm
to a client’s cause
b. To protect the record
c. To protect a witness from being
embarrassed on the stand or
from being harassed by the
opposing counsel
d. To expose the adversary’s unfair
tactics
e. To give the trial court an
opportunity to correct its own
errors
f. To avoid a waiver of the
inadmissibility of an otherwise
inadmissible evidence
V. Rebuttal is the examination by the
prosecution of a witness presented
by them for the purpose of rebutting
the testimony of a witness presented
by the defense in their examination-
in-chief. Sur-rebuttal is the
examination by the defense of a
witness presented by them for the
purpose of rebutting the testimony
of a witness presented by the
prosecution in their examination-in-
chief. After the accused or defendant
has presented his evidence, the
prosecution and the defense in
criminal cases or the plaintiff and
defendant in civil cases, may, in that
order, present rebuttal and sur-
rebuttal evidence unless the court, in
furtherance of justice, permits them
to present additional evidence
bearing upon the main issue or their
original case.
VI. Onus probandi: Rule 131, Sec. 1.
Burden of proof – Burden of proof is
the duty of a party to present
evidence on the facts in issue
necessary to establish his claim or
defense by the amount of evidence
required by law. The party, whether
plaintiff or defendant, who asserts
the affirmative of the issue has the
burden of proof to obtain a favorable
judgment. The burden of proof is
fixed by the pleadings. The claim of
the plaintiff which he must prove, is
spelled out in his complaint. The
defendant’s defenses which he must
likewise prove are to be found in his
 answer to the complaint. The
burdens of proof of both parties do
not shift during the course of the
trial.
VII. Burden of evidence (or burden of
coming forward with the evidence)
is the duty of a party to go forward
with the evidence to overthrow the
prima facie evidence against him.
The burden of going forward of
evidence may shift from one side to
the other as the exigencies of the
trial require, and shifts with
alternating frequency. As the trial
progresses, one party may have
presented the evidence that weigh
heavily in his favor and sufficient to
convince the court of the justness of
his claim. If this occurs, the other
party has burden to come forward
with his own evidence to counteract
whatever positive impression which
the evidence of the other party may
have created in the mind of the
court.
VIII. Rule 133, Sec. 39 – 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 proper motion, the court may
also order the striking out of
answers which are incompetent,
irrelevant or otherwise improper.
IX. Proffer of evidence: Rule 133, Sec.
40 – Tender of excluded evidence –
If documents or things offered in
evidence are excluded by the court,
the offeror may have the same
attached to or made part of the
record. If the evidence excluded is
oral, the offeror may state for the
record the name and other personal
circumstances of the witness and the
substance of the proposed
testimony.
X. Rehabilitation of impeached
witness: By rebutting the evidence
presented to impeach a witness.
XI. Bail in murder cases: File a motion
to be allowed to post bail on the
ground that evidence of prosecution
for murder is weak. Even if the
accused has no right to bail in
murder cases, the court may still
allow the accused to post bail if the
evidence of his guilt is not strong.
XII. Plea bargaining: Rule 116, Sec. 2 –
At arraignment, the accused, with
the consent of the offended party
and the prosecutor, may be allowed
by the trial court to plead guilty to a
lesser offense which is necessarily
included in the offense charged.
After arraignment but before trial,
the accused may still be allowed to
plead guilty to said lesser offense
after withdrawing his plea of not
guilty. No amendment of the
complaint or information is
necessary. (This leads to less work
because there is no long drawn-out
trial so the investigators no longer
have to dig for additional evidence to
secure a conviction for the higher
crime.)
XIII. Secondary evidence: Rule 130, Sec.
5 – When original document is
unavailable – When the original
document has been lost or destroyed
or cannot be produced in court, the
offeror, upon proof of its execution
or existence and the cause of its
unavailability without bad faith on
his part, may prove its contents by a
copy, or by a recital of its contents in
some authentic document, or by the
testimony of witnesses in the order
stated.
XIV. What to do if original document was
lost in case of forged signature: Ask
for stipulation by the other party. If
he does not agree, ask the court to be
allowed to present the original for
comparison and identification.
XV. Preliminary investigation: Under
Section 1, Rule 112 of the Rules of
Court, preliminary investigation is
an inquiry or proceeding made
whenever the offense charged is
punishable by imprisonment of
more than 4 years, 2 months and 1
day without regard to the fine to
 determine whether there is
sufficient ground to engender a well-
founded belief that a crime has been
committed and that the respondent
is probably guilty thereof. One
purpose is to prevent the filing of
malicious, vexatious and unfounded
charge against innocent persons.
Another purpose it to prevent
unnecessary expenses and waste of
time on the part of the State in the
prosecution of cases.
XVI. Pre-trial: Pre-trial is known as the
mandatory conference ordered by
the court wherein the contending
parties and their respective counsels
would have a personal confrontation
before the judge. Pre-trial is
mandatory, both in criminal and civil
cases. In civil cases, the non-
appearance of the plaintiff or his
authorized representative would
result in the dismissal of the case. In
criminal cases, the non-appearance
of the private complainant would not
cause the dismissal of the case. The
court instead may impose sanctions
on the said party. Under Rule 18 of
the Rules of Court, the matters to be
considered in civil cases are: 1)
simplification of issues, 2) the
propriety of rendering a summary
judgment or judgment on the
pleadings, 3) necessity of amending
the pleadings, 4) to determine
whether or not to undergo a trial
conference under a commissioner, 5)
other matters that would aid in the
speedy disposition of cases, and 6)
limitation as to the number of
witnesses. Under Rule 118 of the
Rules of Court, the matters to be
considered during a pre-trial
conference in criminal cases are: 1)
stipulation of facts, 2) plea
bargaining, 3) marking of evidence
of the parties, 4) waiver of the
objection regarding the admissibility
of evidence, and 5) modification of
the order of trial.
XVII. Direct examination: Direct
examination is the examination-in-
chief of a witness by the party
presenting him. Its purpose is to
ascertain from the examining
witness the facts that did and did not
occur prior to the filing of the action.
Generally, leading questions are not
allowed in direct examination
because these questions suggest to
the examining witness the answers
that the examining party desires.
However, there are exceptions: 1) in
cross-examination, 2) preliminary
matters, 3) when there is difficulty in
getting an intelligible answer from a
witness who is ignorant, feeble-
minded or a child of tender years,
and 4) whenever the witness is an
officer, director or agent of a
corporation whether domestic or not
or a partner in a partnership and the
corporation or partnership is an
adverse party to the case.
XVIII. Misleading questions assume as
true those facts not yet testified or
those facts contrary to what the
witness previously stated. They are
not allowed in cross-examination as
well as in direct examination.
However, they can be allowed as
when there was waiver or when the
expert witness is given some
hypothetical questions by the
examining party. An example of this
question would be: “You earlier
testified that you were driving at a
moderate speed, how fast were you
driving?” The question is misleading
because despite the previous
declaration of the witness that he
was only driving at a moderate pace,
the examining counsel still mad it
appear otherwise.
XIX. If the objection was overruled by
the judge, the lawyer should still be a
gentleman and behave in a proper
and modest manner. He should
conduct himself in a way that is
more or less appropriate with the
most noble profession in the world.
Furthermore, the lawyer should
always remember that he himself is
an officer if the court.
XX. Yes, the document may be
withdrawn or excluded. This is not
prohibited since the document has
not been formally offered yet. The
 withdrawal is allowed whenever the
proponent finds no more use for the
document. Also when the document
has been lost or destroyed without
bad faith on the part of the
proponent, the subsequent
withdrawal may be allowed. The
proponent of the withdrawal can ask
the court before the presentation of
the evidence.
XXI. Arraignment is the formal mode of
implementing the constitutional
right of the accused to be informed
of the nature of the accusation
against him. It is conducted before
the court where the complaint or
information has been filed or
assigned for trial. It is done in open
court by the judge or clerk by
furnishing the accused a copy of the
complaint or information reading it
in a language or dialect known to
him and asking him whether he
pleads guilty or not. Both the
arraignment and plea shall be made
of record but failure to enter of
record shall not affect the validity of
the proceedings. It is done within 30
days from acquisition of jurisdiction
over the person of the accused.
XXII. Exclusion of witnesses: Witnesses
who are not testifying but present in
Court is not allowed because the
witness who us just there to watch
the case and is not yet in turn to
testify may concoct stories or
connive with other parties or change
statements. The rules on exclusion
are not applicable when the witness
is an expert or the witness is the
complainant or accused himself. The
court cannot prevent the accused
nor the complainant to be present in
court because their presence is
important to the trial and to conduct
fair trial.
XXIII. Demurrer is a motion that may be
filed by the defendant or the accused
seeking the dismissal of the action
on the ground of insufficiency of
evidence, or that upon the facts and
the law the plaintiff has shown no
right to relief. In a civil case, the
defendant may file a demurrer after
the plaintiff has completed the
presentation of his evidence. In a
criminal case, demurrer may be after
the prosecution rests its case. If
made with leave, it must be filed
within a non-extendible period of 5
days after the prosecution rests its
case.
XXIV. In a civil case, leave of court is not
required before filing a demurrer. In
a criminal case, a demurrer is filed
with or without leave of court. In a
civil case, the quantum of evidence
considered to grant or deny the
demurrer is a mere preponderance
of evidence. In a criminal case,
proof beyond reasonable doubt is
considered. In a civil case, if a
demurrer is granted, the order of
dismissal is appealable while it is not
appealable if granted in a criminal
case because of the constitutional
policy against double jeopardy. In a
civil case, if the demurrer is denied,
the defendant may proceed to
present his evidence while in a
criminal case, the accused may
proceed to produce his evidence
only if the demurrer is filed with
leave of court. In a civil case, if the
demurrer is granted but later
reversed on appeal, the defendant
loses his right to present evidence.
In a criminal case, if the demurrer is
denied, the accused waives his right
to present evidence if the demurrer
is filed without leave of court.
XXV. A motion to quash is a motion that
may be filed by an accused, at any
time before entering his plea, to void
or nullify the complaint or
information filed against him. It
must be in writing, signed by the
accused or his counsel and shall
distinctly specify its factual and legal
grounds. The grounds are:
a. That the facts charged do not
constitute an offense
b. That the court trying the case has
no jurisdiction over the offense
charged
c. That the court trying the case has
no jurisdiction over the person of
the accused
d. That the officer who filed the
information had no authority to
do so
e. That it does not conform
substantially to the prescribed
form
f. That more than one offense is
charged except when a single
punishment for various offenses
is prescribed by law
g. That the criminal action or
liability has been extinguished
h. That it contains averments
which, if true, would constitute a
legal excuse or justification
i. That the accused has been
previously convicted or acquitted
of the offense charged, or the
case against him was dismissed
or otherwise terminated without
his express consent.
The court shall consider no ground
other than those stated in the
motion, except lack of jurisdiction
over the offense charged. If the
motion to quash is sustained, the
court may order that another
complaint or information be filed
except if the motion is based on the
ground that the criminal action or
liability has been extinguished, or
that the accused has been previously
convicted or acquitted of the offense
charged, or the case against him was
dismissed or otherwise terminated
without his express consent. If the
order is made, the accused, if in
custody, shall not be discharged
unless admitted to bail. If no order
is made or if having been made, no
new information is filed within the
time specified in the order or within
such further time as the court may
allow for good cause, the accused, if
in custody, shall be discharged
unless he is also in custody for
another charge. The failure of the
accused to assert any ground of a
motion to quash before he pleads to
the complaint or information, either
because he did not file a motion to
quash or failed to allege the same in
said motion, shall be deemed a
waiver of any objection except those
based on:
a. Failure to charge an offense
b. Lack of jurisdiction over the
offense
c. Extinction of criminal liability
d. Double jeopardy
XXVI. Obligations and rights of a
witness: As a rule, a witness has an
obligation to answer questions,
although his answer may tend to
establish a claim against him. It is
the right of a witness:
a. To be protected from irrelevant,
improper or insulting questions
and from harsh or insulting
demeanor
b. Not to be detained longer than
the interests of justice require
c. Not to be examined except only
as to matters pertinent to the
issue
d. Not to give an answer which will
tend to subject him to a penalty
for an offense unless otherwise
provided by law
e. 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
XXVII. After the examination of a witness
by both sides has been concluded,
the witness cannot be recalled
without leave of court. The court
will grant or withhold leave in its
discretion, as the interests of justice
may require.
XXVIII.Res inter alios acta alteri nocere
non debet literally means that
“things done between strangers
ought not to injure those who are
not parties to them”. In the Rules of
Court, res inter alios acta is
expressed in two rules:
a. The rights of a party cannot be
prejudiced by an act, declaration
or omission of another (except as
provided in the Rules such as
admission by a co-partner or
agent, admission by conspirator,
 admission by privies and
admission by silence)
b. Evidence that one did or did not
do a certain thing at one time is
not admissible to prove that he
did or did not do the same or
similar thing at another time; but
it may be received to prove a
specific intent or knowledge,
identity, plan, system, scheme,
habit, custom, usage and the like
XXIX. As a general rule, opinion of a
witness is not admissible. However,
the rule is subject to 2 exceptions:
a. Opinion of an expert witness or
an opinion of a witness on a
matter requiring special
knowledge, skill, experience or
training which he is shown to
possess
b. Opinion of an ordinary witness,
for which proper basis is given,
regarding:
i. The identity of a person
about whom he has
absolute knowledge
ii. A handwriting with which
he has sufficient
familiarity
iii. The mental sanity of a
person with whom he is
sufficiently acquainted
iv. His impressions of the
emotion, behavior,
condition or appearance
of a person
XXX. As a general rule, character
evidence is not admissible in
evidence. However, the rule has
exceptions:
a. In criminal cases:
i. The accused may prove
his good moral character
which is pertinent to the
moral trait involved in the
offense charged
ii. Unless in rebuttal, the
prosecution may not
prove his bad moral
character which is
pertinent to the moral
trait involved in the
offense charged
iii. 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
b. In civil cases: Evidence of the
moral character of a party in a
civil case is admissible only when
pertinent to the issue of
character involved in the case.
Evidence of good character of a
witness is admissible when such
character has been impeached
XXXI. Rule 132, Sec. 11. Impeachment of
adverse party’s witness – A witness
may be impeached by the party
against whom he was called, by
contradictory evidence, by evidence
that his general reputation for truth,
honesty or integrity is bad, or by
evidence that he has made at other
times statements inconsistent with
his present testimony, but not 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.
XXXII. Rule 132, Sec. 12. Party may not
impeach his own witness – Except
with respect to unwilling or hostile
witnesses or a witness who is an
adverse party of an officer, director
or managing agent of a public or
private corporation or of a
partnership or association which is
an adverse party, the party
producing a witness is not allowed
to impeach his credibility. A witness
may be considered as unwilling or
hostile only if so declared by the
court upon adequate showing of his
adverse interest, unjustified
reluctance to testify, or his having
misled the party into calling him to
the witness stand. The unwilling or
hostile witness so declared, or the
witness who is an adverse party,
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. He may also be
impeached and cross-examined by
the adverse party, but such cross-
examination must only be on the
subject matter of his examination-in-
chief.
XXXIII. Rule 132, Sec. 13 – Before a witness
can be impeached by evidence that
he has made at other times
statements inconsistent with his
present testimony, the statements
must be related to him, with the
circumstances of the times and
places and the persons present, and
he mush be asked whether he made
such statements, and if so, allowed to
explain them. If the statements be in
writing, they must be shown to the
witness before any question is put to
him concerning them.