V.

  PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE

 
A. WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES SO THAT A PIECE OF EVIDENCE WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THE COURTS? – done

The following are the requisites so that a piece of evidence will be considered by the courts:
1. The evidence must be relevant or material
2. The evidence must not be hearsay
3. The evidence must be authenticated by a competent witness; and
4. The document must be formally offered in evidence.

(Section 3, Section 4, Rule 128, Rules of Court as amended by A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC)

Sec. 3. Admissibility of evidence – evidence is admissible when it is relevant to the issue and is not excluded by the Constitution,
the law or rules.
 
Sec. 4. Relevancy; collateral matters. – Evidence must have such relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its existence or
non-existence. Evidence in collateral matters should not be allowed, except when it tends in any reasonable degree to establish the
probability or improbability of the fact in issue.

A. Relevancy – Evidence have such a relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its existence or non-existence.
 
Axiom of Relevance: None but facts having rational probative value are admissible.

1. The material presented as evidence must affect the issue or question. It must have a bearing on the outcome of the case.
It requires both:

a. Rational or logical relevancy in that it has a connection to the issue and therefore it has a tendency to establish
the fact which it is offered to prove. The evidence must therefore have probative value   

b. Legal relevancy in that the evidence is offered to prove a matter which has been properly put in issue as
determined by the pleadings in civil cases, or as fixed by the pre-trial order, or as determined by substantive law.
If so the matter has materiality.

Illustration:

i.    In Criminal Cases: the fact that the crime was committed at nighttime is rationally or logically
relevant to a killing at 12 midnight but evidence thereon would be not be legally relevant if nighttime was
not alleged in the Information. It would be immaterial.

ii.    In Civil Cases: In an action for sum of money based on a promissory note, evidence that the
defendant was misled into signing the note would be rationally relevant but if fraud was never alleged as a
defense, then evidence thereof would be legally irrelevant or immaterial.   
 
The components of relevancy are therefore probative value and materiality.

2. Rules as to collateral matters – Evidence in collateral matters should not be allowed, except when it tends in any
reasonable degree to establish the probability or improbability of the fact in issue.
 
Collateral Matters – facts or matters which are not in issue. They are not generally allowed to be proven except
when relevant.
 
In Criminal Cases, the collateral matters allowed to be proven, being relevant include:

i.    Antecedent Circumstances, or those in existing even prior to the commission of the crime. They
include such matters as habit, custom, bad moral character when self defense is invoked; or plan design,
conspiracy, or premeditation, agreement to a price, promise or reward

ii.    Concomitant circumstances or those which accompany the commission of the crime such as
opportunity to do the act or incompatibility 

iii.    Subsequent circumstances or those which occur after the commission of the crime, such as flight,
escape, concealment, offer of compromise

Example: Motive is generally irrelevant and proof thereof is not allowed

 
except: when the evidence is purely circumstantial, when there is doubt as to the identity of the accused,
or when it is an element of the crime.
 
 B. Competency – The evidence is not excluded by law or rules.

Axiom of Competence: All facts having rational probative value are admissible unless some specific law or rules forbids them.

B. WHAT IS OFFER OF EVIDENCE? – Sec. 34, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court
 
 People vs Edgardo Yap – the statement made by counsel as to what he expects to prove through a witness. Thus, "offer of evidence,"
as used in Section 34 of Rule 132 must be understood to include the presentation or introduction of evidence. What is essential in
order that an offer of testimony may be valid, therefore, is that the witness be called and asked appropriate questions.
 
 A party may therefore opt to formally offer his evidence if he believes that it will advance his cause or not to do so at all. In the
event he chooses not to offer, the trial court is not authorized by the Rules to consider the same. If evidence was not formally offered,
the court cannot assign it evidentiary weight or value.

Other supporting cases:

Republic of the Philippines vs. Gimenez, GR No. 174673

The rule on formal offer of evidence is intertwined with the constitutional guarantee of due process. Parties must be
given the opportunity to review the evidence submitted against them and take the necessary actions to secure their
case. Hence, any document or object that was marked for identification is not evidence unless it was "formally offered and
the opposing counsel [was] given an opportunity to object to it or cross-examine the witness called upon to prove or
identify it." 

Sabay vs. People of the Philippines, GR No. 192150

 Formal offer means that the offering party shall inform the court of the purpose of introducing its exhibits into evidence,
to assist the court in ruling on their admissibility in case the adverse party objects. Without a formal offer of evidence,
courts cannot take notice of this evidence even if this has been previously marked and identified.

C. WHEN MAY A COURT CONSIDER EVIDENCE WHICH WAS NOT FORMALLY OFFERED? – EXCEPTION

trial court is bound to consider only the testimonial evidence presented and exclude the documents not offered. Documents
which may have been identified and marked as exhibits during pre-trial or trial but which were not formally offered in evidence
cannot in any manner be treated as evidence. Neither can such unrecognized proof be assigned any evidentiary weight and value.

1.    A formal offer of evidence is not required in certain cases:

a.    In a summary proceeding because it is a proceeding where there is no full-blown trial – no occasion to speak of a
formal offer of evidence.
 Summary proceeding –
o CIVIL CASE INVOLVED: all cases of forcible entry and unlawful detainer irrespective of the amount of
damages or unpaid rentals sought to be recovered
o All other civil cases, except probate proceedings, where the total amount of the plaintiff's claim does
not 10 000, exclusive of interest and costs.

o CRIM CASES: Violations of traffic laws, rules and regulations; Violations of the rental law; Violations
of municipal or city ordinances; All other criminal cases where the penalty prescribed by law for the
offense charged is imprisonment not exceeding six months, or a fine not exceeding 1000, or both,
irrespective of other imposable penalties, accessory or otherwise, or of the civil liability arising therefrom

o Procedure - Civil: Plaintiff files a complaint – judge determines it if it falls under summary procedure –
serve summons asking the party to answer to the complaint – if answered is filed, calls for preliminary
conference – judgment

b.    Matters which need not be proved – Documents judicially admitted (does not require proof (Rule 129, section 4)
or taken judicial notice of (does not need evid – R. 129);

c.    Documents, affidavits and depositions used in rendering a summary judgment – part of a summary procedure

d.    Documents or affidavits used in deciding quasi-judicial or administrative cases (Bantolino v. Coca Cola Bottlers,
Inc., 403 SCRA 699);
  administrative bodies like the NLRC are not bound by the technical niceties of law and procedure and the rules
obtaining in courts of law. Indeed, the Revised Rules of Court and prevailing jurisprudence may be given only
stringent application, i.e., by analogy or in a suppletory character and effect. The submission by respondent,
citing People v. Sorrel, that an affidavit not testified to in a trial, is mere hearsay evidence and has no real evidentiary
value, cannot find relevance in the present case considering that a criminal prosecution requires a quantum of
evidence different from that of an administrative proceeding. Under the Rules of the Commission, the Labor
Arbiter is given the discretion to determine the necessity of a formal trial or hearing. Hence, trial-type hearings
are not even required as the cases may be decided based on verified position papers, with supporting documents
and their affidavits.

e.    Lost objects previously marked, identified, described in the record, and testified to by witnesses who had been
subjects of cross-examination in respect to said objects (Tabuena v. Court of Appeals, 196 SCRA 650; People v. Napat-a,
179 SCRA 403).

f. joint hearing – where 2 or more cases are jointly heard, offer of evid in one is also an offer of evid. in the other case.

2.    Instances where the court allowed the admission of evidence not formally offered provided that certain elements are
present: (People v. Napat-a, supra, citing People v. Matte (103 SCRA 484))

a.    The evidence must have been duly identified by testimony duly recorded; and
b.    The same must have been incorporated in the records of the case.

In People v. Libnao (395 SCRA 47), evidences of the prosecution in a crime involving a violation of the Dangerous Drugs
Act of 1972 were considered by the court even without their having been formally offered because the evidence were
properly identified by testimony duly recorded and incorporated in the records of the case. The counsel for the
accused also cross-examined the witnesses testifying on the evidence.

 Note: While rules of procedure may be relaxed in the interest of justice and fair play, this Court shall refrain from
doing so if there is not even the slightest effort to provide the courts with a reason to justify the non-observance of the same
(HEIRS OF SERAPIO MABBORANG v. Hermogenes Mabborang)

 
3.    Evidence which did not form part of a party’s formal offer of evidence but the same was formed part of the adverse
party’s formal offer of evidence.

(Titan Construction Company v. Uni-Field Enterprises, Inc., 517 SCRA 180). In this case, certain delivery receipts and
sales invoices did not form part of respondent's formal offer of evidence but the same formed part of petitioner's formal
offer of evidence. Petitioner insists that since the said documents did not form part of the evidence formally offered by
respondent, the trial court and the Court of Appeals had no legal basis to award interest and damages in his favor. The
court held that no error could be ascribed to the lower courts because the delivery receipts and sales invoices were
nevertheless formally offered by petitioner in evidence. Hence, the documents may be considered by the courts below 

D. WHAT ARE THE REASONS WHY EVIDENCE MUST BE OFFERED?

1. necessary because judges are mandated to rest their findings of facts and their judgment only and strictly upon the
evidence offered by the parties at the trial
2. enable the trial judge to know the purpose or purposes for which the proponent is presenting the evidence (Hrs. of Save v.
Hrs. of Saves)
3. allows opposing parties to examine the evidence and object to its admissibility
4. facilitates review as the appellate court will not be required to review documents not previously scrutinized by the trial
court.

 Rules of procedure are not ends in themselves. The object of these rules is to assist and facilitate a trial court's function to be
able to receive all the evidence of the parties, and evaluate their admissibility and probative value in the context of the issues
presented by the parties' pleadings in order to arrive at a conclusion as to the facts that transpired. Having been able to
establish the facts, the trial court will then be able to apply the law and determine whether a complainant is deserving of the
reliefs prayed for in the pleading. (R. v. Gimenez)

 importance of formal offer of evidence

- As triers of facts, judges are mandated to rest their findings of facts and their judgment only and strictly upon the
evidence offered by the parties at the trial.
 

E. WHY MUST THE PURPOSE OF THE PRESENTATION OF THE EVIDENCE BE INCLUDED IN THE OFFER? – Sec. 34,
Rule 132
- because the admissibility of the evidence being offered will depend on its purpose. 

 allows the adverse party to examine the evidence and may interpose its objection – in view of the multiple
admissibility of evidence
 Where the offer is inadmissible for the purpose stated in the offer, it must be REJECTED.

F. MAY A PIECE OF EVIDENCE BE CONSIDERED BY THE COURT FOR PURPOSES NOT INDICATED IN THE OFFER? 

 NO, to consider a party’s evidence which was not formally offered during trial would deprive the other party of due
process. Evidence not formally offered has no probative value and must be excluded by the court (P. v. Gimenez) (in this
case, petitioner’s failure to file its written Formal Offer of Evidence of the numerous documentary evidence presented
within the prescribed period is a non-issue)

G. WHAT IS AUTHENTICATION OF EVIDENCE?

 Process of evidencing that the thing here shown did come from the very person or place testified to by the witness.
 Preliminary step in showing the admissibility of an evidence.

o Example: .38 revolver (weapon) – found in the crime scene – must be shown that the weapon in court is
the very same weapon found in the same crime scene – must be authenticated by the police investigator
who handled the evidence – when he affirms, then that’s authentication

 Discloses the legal presumption – that objects and documents presented in evidence, are as a rule, counterfeit. THUS, it
is incumbent upon the proponent of the evidence to prove its authenticity.

 process by which documentary evidence and other physical evidence is proven to be genuine and not a forgery.
 positive identification of the witness that the document presented is genuine and had been duly executed or that it is neither
spurious nor counterfeit nor executed by mistake or under duress. (Sales vs Sta. Mesa Market, GR No. 157766, July 12,
2007)

 can be shown in two ways:

1.    A witness can testify as to the chain of custody through which the evidence passed from the time of the discovery up
until the trial.
2.    The evidence can be authenticated by the opinion of an expert witness examining the evidence to determine if it has all
of the properties that it would be expected to have if it were authentic.

 Before any private document is offered as authentic is received in evidence, its due execution and authenticity must be
proved either:
a) By anyone who saw the document executed or written; or
b) b)  By evidence of the genuineness of the signature or handwriting of the maker.

H. WHO IS A SPONSOR IN EVIDENCE?

 witness who is the sponsor in evidence.
 every evidence, whether it be a document or an object, needs a witness. Even object evidence requires statements from a
witness to make its way into the realm of admissible evidence.
 

Testimonial evidence
- provides the foundation for all types of evidence.
- To authenticate the object, the witness must have capacity to identify the object as the very thing involved in the
litigation.
 - He must have actual and personal knowledge of the exhibit he is presenting for admission. This is because "a witness
can only testify to those facts which he knows of his personal knowledge; that is, which are derived from his own
perception..." (Section 22, Rule 130, Rules of Court as Amended by A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC )

I. WHAT IS AN OBJECTION?

 a formal protest raised in court during a trial to disallow a witness’ testimony or other evidence, which would be in violation
of the rules of evidence or other procedural law. 
 
 purposes

a.    To keep out an inadmissible evidence that would cause harm to client’s cause;

b.    To protect the record, i.e., to present the issue of inadmissibility of the offered evidence in a way that if the trial court
rules erroneously, the error can be relied upon as a ground for future appeal;

c.    To protect a witness from being embarrassed by the adverse counsel;
d.    To expose the adversary’s unfair tactics like his consistently asking obviously leading questions; and

e.    To give the Trial Court an opportunity to correct its own errors and at the same time warn the court that a ruling
adverse to the objector may supply a reason to invoke a higher court’s appellate jurisdiction

J. WHEN SHOULD AN OBJECTION  BE MADE IN THE CASE OF:

1. TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE

 Ordinary Rules:
o
Objection to evidence offered orally must be made immediately after the offer is made.

o Objection to a question propounded (submit/offer) in the course of the oral examination of a witness shall be
made as soon as the grounds therefor shall become reasonably apparent

 Judicial Affidavit Rule:

o
The party presenting the judicial affidavit of his witness in place of direct testimony shall state the purpose of such
testimony at the start of the presentation of the witness. The adverse party may move to disqualify the witness or to
strike out his affidavit or any of the answers found in it on ground of inadmissibility.

 Rule on Continuous Trial:

The proper time to object depends in the form of testimony. For instance, if the testimony is oral, the proper time to make
objections will be the same as under ordinary rules. Also, if the testimony is in the form of judicial affidavits, the proper
time to object will be that as set forth under the Judicial Affidavit Rule.
 

2. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE / OBJECT EVIDENCE

 Ordinary Rules:

Exhibits may be offered orally or in writing. Objection to evidence offered orally must be made immediately after the offer
is made. An offer of evidence in writing shall be objected to within three days after the notice of the offer unless a different
period is allowed by the court.

 Judicial Affidavit Rule:

After each piece of exhibit is offered, the adverse party shall state the legal ground for his objection, if any, to its
admission, and the court shall immediately make its ruling respecting that exhibit.
  Rule on Continuous Trial:

After the proponent makes his oral offer of exhibits on the same day after the presentation of the last witness, the opposing
party is required to interpose immediately his oral comments or objections thereto. Thereafter, the court shall make a
ruling on the offer of evidence in open court. 
 

K. WHAT IS THE EFFECT IF AN OBJECTION IS NOT TIMELY MADE?

Where the accused fails to object to the admissibility of certain items during their formal offer, he is deemed to have waived his
right against their admissibility (People v. Diaz, 271 SCRA 504).

The provisions of the Rules of Court give a simple rule as to when evidence is to be offered. Hence, the presentation of a
documentary or object evidence for marking and identification during the course of the trial is not the offer contemplated in the
rules. Failure to object to the evidence at this time should not be construed as a waiver of the objection to the evidence.

L. WHAT IS THE REASON WHY AN OBJECTION MUST BE MADE TO QUESTIONS PERTAINING TO DOCUMENTS
WHICH ARE INADMISSIBLE EVEN BEFORE THE DOCUMENTS ARE OFFERED?

Objection to evidence must be made at the time it is formally offered. In case of documentary evidence, offer is made after all the
witnesses of the party making the offer have testified, specifying the purpose for which the evidence is being offered. It is only at
this time, and not at any other, that objection to the documentary evidence may be made. 

And when a party failed to interpose a timely objection to evidence at the time they were offered in evidence, such objection shall
be considered as waived. This is true even if by its nature the evidence is inadmissible and would have surely been rejected if it had
been challenged at the proper time. 

Moreover, grounds for objection must be specified in any case. Grounds for objections not raised at the proper time shall be
considered waived, even if the evidence was objected to on some other ground. Thus, even on appeal, the appellate court may not
consider any other ground of objection, except those that were raised at the proper time (Spouses Marcelian Tapayan And Alice
Tapayan, Petitioners,Vs. Ponceda M. Martinez, G.R. No. 207786, January 30, 2017).
 
Purpose of objection as to inadmissibility of evidence:

a.    Objections are made to keep out inadmissible evidence that would cause harm to a client's cause. The rules of
evidence are not self-operating and hence, must be invoked by way of an objection;
b.    Objections are interposed to protect the record, i.e. to present the issue of inadmissibility of the offered
evidence in a way that if the trial court rules erroneously, the error can be relied upon as a ground for a future
appeal;
c.    Objections are made to avoid a waiver of the inadmissibility of an otherwise inadmissible evidence.
 

M. WHAT ARE THE KINDS OF OBJECTION ACCORDING TO: done

1. Scope

a.    General or Broadside – does not go beyond declaring the evidence as immaterial, incompetent, irrelevant or
inadmissible. It does not specify the grounds.

 Objections that do not clearly indicate to the judge the ground upon which the objections are predicated; they
assign no grounds to the objection; and actually specify nothing.

b.    Specific – states the ground upon which the objection is made.

 Objections where the objector is explicit as to the legal ground he invokes, as in, precisely stating the
exclusionary rule that would justify his opposition to the preferred evidence.

2. Nature

a.    Objection as to form/Formal Objection

 Formal, which is one directed against the alleged defect in the formulation of the question. 

Example: ambiguous questions, leading and misleading questions, repetitious questions, multiple questions, and
argumentative questions.

>leading, argumentative; can be asked again if re-phrased

>A formal objection is one directed against the alleged defect in the formulation of the question. 

b.    Objection as to substance/Substantive Objection

Substantive, which is one made and directed against the very nature of the evidence, as in, it is inadmissible either because
it is irrelevant or incompetent, or both.

Example: parol, not the best evidence, hearsay, privileged, res inter alios acta, etc.

>hearsay, privileged; cannot be asked again

>A substantive objection are objections made and directed against the very nature of the evidence, 

Example: it is inadmissible either because it is irrelevant or incompetent or both. 

 

N. GIVE 10 EXAMPLES OF FORMAL OBJECTIONS. – done

 
A formal objection is one directed against the alleged defect in the formulation of the question.
 
Examples of formal objections are the following:

1)    Objection to the question for being leading

2)    Objection to the question for being misleading
3)    Objection to the question for it has already been answered (repetitious questions)
4)    Objection to the question for being argumentative
5)    Objection to the question for being vague
6)    Objection for badgering the witness
7)    Objection for non-responsive (witness doesn’t answer the question)
8)    Objection to multiple questions, all linked by “and” or “or”
9)    Objection to question calling for narrative/narrative answer
10)    Objection to question as to relevance
 

O. GIVE  10 EXAMPLES OF SUBSTANTIVE OBJECTIONS. - done

A substantive objection are objections made and directed against the very nature of the evidence, i.e., it is inadmissible either
because it is irrelevant or incompetent or both. 

Examples of formal objections are the following:

1)    Objection to the question for it calls for hearsay evidence.

2)    Objection to the question for lack of basis, or it assumes a fact not established.
3)    Objection to the question for it invades the field of confidential communication.
4)    Objection to the question for it calls for a conclusion of law.
5)    Objection to the question for it calls for a conclusion of fact.
6)    Objection to the question for the proper foundation has not been laid.
7)    Objection to the question for it calls for the opinion of the witness.
8)    Objection to the question for the witness is incompetent.
9)    Objection to the question for being inadmissible under the parole evidence rule.
10)    Objection to the question for it attempts to elicit from the witness self-serving evidence.
11)    Objection to the question for the document offered is self-serving.
 
P. WHAT IS OFFER OF PROOF? – Section 40, Rule 132
- “tender of excluded evidence”
 process/procedure to be done by the offeror 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.

Offer of proof refers to testimonial, documentary and object evidence that are presented or offered in court by a party so that the
court can consider his evidence when it comes to the preparation of the decision.

Offer of proof, is the process by which a proponent of an excluded evidence tenders the same. 
•    If what has been excluded is testimonial evidence, the tender is made by stating for the record the name and other
personal circumstances of the proposed witness and the substance of his proposed testimony. 

•    If the evidence excluded is documentary or of things, the offer of proof is made by having the same attached to or made
a 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.

Q. WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF OFFER OF PROOF?

The tender of excluded evidence is done for two reasons:

 
•    First, to allow the court to know the nature of the testimony or the documentary evidence and convince the trial judge
to permit the evidence or testimony. 
•    Second, even if he is not convinced to reverse his earlier ruling, the tender is made to create and preserve a record for
appeal.

These procedures are known as offer of proof or tender of excluded evidence and are made for purposes of appeal. If an adverse
judgment is eventually rendered against the offeror, he may in his appeal assign as error the rejection of the excluded evidence.
(FORTUNE TOBACCO CORPORATION vs. CIR)