Anama vs
Philippine Savings Bank, 2012)
PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS -The rule on liberal construction does not mean that
procedural rules are to be ignored or disdained at will
I. BASIC CONCEPTS ON to suit the convenience of the party
EVIDENCE
*Procedural law has its own rationale in the
orderly administration of justice, namely, to ensure the
1. Evidence Defined effective enforcement of substantive rights by
providing for a system that obviates arbitrariness,
Sec. 1, Rule 128 of the Rules of Court provides for
caprice, despotism, or whimsicality in the settlement of
the definition of evidence
disputes (Abrenica vs Law Firm of Abrenica, Tungol
Sec. 1, Evidence defined- is the means sanctioned and Tibayan, 2006; Reyes vs Fil-Estate 2007)
by these rules, of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding
-The liberal construction is not a license to violate
the truth respecting a matter of fact.
procedural requirements. They are designed to
facilitate the adjudication of cases.
DISTINCTION BETWEEN EVIDENCE AND PROOF *The liberality in their interpretation and
application of the rules applies only in proper cases
EVIDENCE PROOF and under justifiable circumstances.
Is the medium of proof Is the effect or result of
or the means sanctioned evidence *Concomitant to a procedure adopting a liberal
by the rules in construction of the rules should be an effort on the
ascertaining the truth part of the party invoking liberality to explain his
respecting a matter of failure to abide by the rules. Abrenica vs Law Firm of
fact Abrenica, Tungol and Tibayan, 2006, Banez vs Dela
Salle, 2006)
DISTINCTION BETWEEN FACTUM PROBANDUM -In Rural Bankers vs Tanghal-Salvana, the court held
and FACTUM PROBANS that:
-The rules of evidence allow a trial court to rely -They cannot be given greater evidentiary
on circumstantial evidence to support its conclusion of value over the testimony of credible witnesses who
guilt.(People vs Federico Lucero, 2011) testify on affirmative matters (People vs Piosang,
2013)
5. Circumstantial Evidence- is that evidence
which proves a fact or series of facts from
10. Negative Evidence- is a testimony that a 16. Clear and Convincing Evidence- is a kind of
certain fact did not exist. evidence which establishes in the minds of a
trier of facts a firm belief on the existence of
Note: the fact in issue.
a. Denial and Alibi are negative defenses 17. Competent evidence- is the kind of evidence
GR: they are self-serving negative evidence; which is not otherwise excluded by the law or
they cannot prevail over the spontaneous, rules.
positive, and credible testimonies of the 18. Incompetent Evidence- the kind of evidence
prosecution witnesses who pointed to and which is excluded by law or by the rules.
identified the accused. 19. Relevant Evidence- kind of evidence which
has a relation to the fact in issue. (Sec. 3, Rule
11. Prima Facie Evidence- The term “prima facie 130)
evidence” denotes evidence which, if 20. Material Evidence- one that is directed to
unexplained or uncontradicted is sufficient to prove a fact in issue as determined by the
sustain the proposition it supports or to rules on substantive law and pleadings
establish the facts. (Bautista vs Aparece)
21. Rebuttal evidence- is any competent
-prima facie means it is sufficient to establish a evidence to explain, repeal, counteract, or
fact or raise a presumption UNLESS disproved or disprove adversary’s proof. It is receivable only
rebutted (Republic vs SandiganBayan, 2011) where new matters have been developed by
the evidence of one of the parties and is
12. Conclusive Evidence- is an evidence which generally limited to a reply to new matters
establishes the fact. (US vs Pons) (Ago Timber Corporation vs Abaya, 1978)
13. Substantial Evidence- in proceedings before 22. Sur-Rebuttal Evidence- evidence in reply to
administrative and quasi-judicial agencies, the or to rebut new matter introduced in rebuttal.
quantum of evidence required to establish a (Sandakan vs Sero, 1964)
fact is Substantial evidence or that level of 23. Primary Evidence- kind of evidence which
evidence which a reasonable mind might assures the greatest certainty of fact sought to
accept as adequate to justify a conclusion. be proved, and which does not in itself,
(Sagun vs Sun Ace International Management, indicate the existence of other and better proof
2011) (Delta Motor Sales Corporation vs Bernardo,
14. Preponderance of Evidence- is the weight, 1981)
credit and value of the aggregate evidence on 24. Secondary evidence- is any evidence other
either side and is usually considered to be than the document itself
synonymous with the term “greater weight of
the evidence” or “greater weight of the credible Example:
evidence”
a. A copy
-it is a phrase which means probability of truth b. Recital of its contents in some authentic
that is more convincing to the court as worthy of belief document
that which is offered in opposition thereto (Cavile vs c. Recollection of the witness (Sec. 4, Rule 130)
Litania-Hong, 2009) 25. Evidence in Chief- is the primary and main
evidence presented by the parties to prove
-in civil cases, the party having burden of proof their cause or defense.
must establish his case by a preponderance of 26. Newly discovered Evidence- must be one
evidence. that could not, by exercise of due diligence,
have been discovered before the trial in the
15. Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt- is the
court below.
required quantum of evidence in order to
convict an accused. -The determinative test is the presence of due or
reasonable diligence to locate the thing to be used as
-A judgment of conviction must rest on nothing
evidence in the trial
less than moral certainty in an unprejudiced mind that
it was the accused who committed the crime, failing -For new trial to be granted on the ground of newly
which the accused must be exonerated. discovered evidence, the following are the conditions:
-If the prosecution failed to discharge its a. The evidence must have been discovered
burden of establishing the guilt of the accused, it is after the trial
unnecessary to still pass on the accused’s defense. b. The evidence could not have been
(People vs Rubio, 2009) discovered at the trial even with the
exercise of reasonable diligence;
c. The evidence is material not merely 12. Application of other provisions of the
cumulative, corroborative or impeaching Rules of Court and the Rules on Evidence
d. The evidence must affect the merits of the to DNA Evidence Rule
case and produce a different result if
admitted. (Briones vs People, 2009) Sec. 2 of the DNA Evidence Rule (AM No 06-11-5-
SC) provides for the rule on the application of other
8. Hierarchy if Evidentiary Values rules of evidence in DNA evidence.
Highest Level- Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt Sec. 2 APPLICATION OF OTHER RULES ON
EVIDENCE
-Clear and Convincing Evidence
In all matters not specifically covered by this
-Preponderance of Evidence Rule, the Rules of Court and other pertinent provisions
of law on evidence shall apply.
Last- Substantial Evidence
13. Application of the Rules of Court to the
9. What are the Sources of the Rules on Child Witness Examination Rule
Evidence
1. 1987 Constitution Sec 1 of the Child Witness Examination Rule (AM
2. Rules 128-134 of the RoC No 004-07-SC) provides for the rule on the
3. Resolution of the SC dated March 14, 1989 on application of the Child Witness Examination Rule
the proposed rule son evidence;
4. Judicial Affidavit Rule (AM No 12-8-8-SC, Sec. 1 APPLICABILITY OF THE RULE
effective January 1, 2013) Unless otherwise provided, this Rule shall
5. Child Witness Examination Rule (AM No 004- govern the examination of child witnesses who:
07-SC, December 15, 2000)
6. DNA Evidence Rule (AM No 06-11-5-SC, 1. Are victims of the crime
October 15, 2007) 2. Accused of a crime, and
7. Electronic Evidence Rule (AM No 01-7-01-SC) 3. Witnesses to crime
8. Rule 115 of the Rules on CrimPro
9. RA 4200 Anti-wiretapping Act It shall apply in all criminal and non-criminal
10. RA 9372 Human Securities Act proceedings involving child witnesses.
11. Substantive and Remedial Statute
14. Scope of Electronic Evidence Rule
12. Judicial decisions
Sec 1 of the Electronic Evidence Rule (AM No 01-
7-01-SC) provides that
10. Scope of the Rules of Evidence
Sec 1. SCOPE
Sec. 2, Rule 128 of the Rules of Court provides that
Unless otherwise provided herein, these Rules
Sec. 2 SCOPE shall apply whenever an electronic document or
electronic data message as defined in Section 2 hereof
The rules of evidence shall be the same in all is offered or used in evidence.
courts and in all trials and hearings EXCEPT as
otherwise provided by law or these Rules. 15. Cases covered by the Rules on Electronic
Evidence
11. Scope of the DNA Evidence Rule
Sec 2 of the Electronic Evidence Rule (AM No 01-
Sec. 1 of the DNA Evidence Rule (AM No 06-11-5- 7-01-SC) provides that:
SC) provides that
Sec 2. CASES COVERED
Sec 1. SCOPE
These Rules shall apply to all civil actions and
This Rule shall apply whenever DNA evidence proceedings, as well as quasi-judicial and
as defined in Section 3hereof, is offered, used or administrative cases.
proposed to be offered or used as evidence in:
Note:
1. All criminal actions
2. Civil actions; and -Electronic Evidence Rule applies only civil actions and
3. Special proceedings quasi-judicial and administrative proceedings and not
to criminal cases.
16. Scope of Application of the Judicial affidavits of the prosecution, he shall have
Affidavit Rule the option to submit his judicial affidavit as
well as those of his witnesses to the court
Sec 1 of the Judicial Affidavit Rule provides that: within ten days from receipt of such
Sec 1. SCOPE affidavits and serve a copy of each on the
public and private prosecutor, including his
This Rule shall apply to all actions, proceedings documentary marked as Exhibits 1, 2, 3
and incidents requiring the reception of evidence and so on. These affidavits shall serve as
before: direct testimonies of the accused and his
witnesses when they appear before the
1. The Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial court to testify.
Courts in cities, Municipal Trail Courts,
Municipal Circuit Trial Courts, and the Shari’a
Circuit Courts but shall not apply to small
claims cases under AM No 08-8-7-SC 18. In what cases will the Rules on Evidence
2. The RTC and the Shari’a District Courts not apply
3. The Snadiganbayan, CTA, CA and Shari’a Sec 4 Rule 1 of the Rules of Civil Procedure
Appellate Courts provides for the rule on the non-applicability of the
4. The investigating officers and bodies provisions of the Rules of Court inclusive of the Rules
authorized by the SC to receive evidence, of Evidence.
including the IBP; and
5. The special courts and quasi-judicial bodies, Sec. 4 IN WHAT CASES NOT APPLICABLE
whose rules of procedure are subject to
disapproval of the SC, insofar as their existing These Rules shall not apply to:
rules of procedure contravene the provisions of 1. Election cases
this Rule. 2. Land Registration
6. For purpose of brevity, the above courts, 3. Cadastral
quasi-judicial bodies, or investigating officers 4. Naturalization, and
shall be uniformly referred to here as the 5. Insolvency proceedings
“court” 6. And other cases not herein provided for
17. Application of the Judicial Affidavit Rule in XPN: by analogy or in a suppletory character and
Criminal cases whenever practicable and convenient.
Sec. 9 APPLICATION OF RULE TO CRIMINAL CASES WHICH ARE NOT DIRECTLY GOVERNED BY
ACTIONS THE RULES OF EVIDENCE
a. The issue involved is one of fact and not of JUDICIAL NOTICE, WHEN HEARING NECESSARY
law; and During the trial, the court:
b. The foreign law must be proved like any other
fact. 1. On its own initiative, or
2. On request of a party
XPN:
-may announce its intention to take JN of any matter
a. When the court has actual knowledge of the and allow the parties to be heard thereon.
foreign laws;
b. When the court has already ruled upon in a After the trial and before judgment or on appeal,
case involving the said foreign law. the proper court:
-Like any other facts, they must be alleged and 1. on its own initiative , or
proved. 2. On request of a party
-In Merope Enriquex Vda de Catalan vs Louella A. -may take JN of any matter and allow the parties to be
Catalan Lee, the court held that, Australian marital heard thereon if such matter is decisive of a
laws are not among those matters that judges ought to material issue in the case.
know by reason of their official function. The power of
judicial notice must be exercised with caution, and
every reasonable doubt upon the subject should be
resolved in the negative. II. JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS
DOCTRINE OF “PRESUMED-IDENTITY
APPROACH” OR PROCESSUAL PRESUMPTION”
1. JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS
-Where the foreign law is not pleaded or, even if
Sec. 4, Rule 129
pleaded, is not proved, the preumption is that
foreign law is the same as ours. (ATCI Overseas Judicial Admission- is an admission:
Corporation, Amalia G. Ikdal and Ministry of Public
Health-Kuwait vs Ma. Josefa Echin, 2010) a. Verbal, or
b. Written
ARE COURTS MANDATORILY REQUIRED TO TAKE
JUDICIAL NOTICE OF THE LAWS AND MUNICIPAL -made by the party in course of the proceedings of the
ORDINANCES same case, does not require proof.
a. Definite
b. Certain
GR: In case of ordinances, Regional Trial c. Unequivocal
Courts are not mandatorily required to take JN.
XPN: -Otherwise, the disputed fact will not be settled.
1. When it is required bylaw or by the
PURPOSE OF ADMISSION: IT CANNOT BE
statute;
CONTRADICTED EXCEPT THORUGH PALPABLE
2. In case of appeal involving the ordinance;
MISTAKE: LIBERALITY IN APPLICATION OF THE
3. In case of issue of facts which are of
RULES
unquestionable demonstration.
-Every alleged admission is taken as an entirety of the
fact which makes for the one side with the
qualifications which limit, modify or destroy its effect -Correspondingly, facts alleged in the complaint are
on the other side. deemed admissions of the plaintiff and binding upon
him.
-The reason for this is, where part of a statement of a
party is used against him as an admission, the court -The allegations, statements or admissions contained
should weigh any other portion connected with the in a pleading are conclusive as against the pleader.
statement, which tends to neutralize or explain the
portion which is against the interest. DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN JUDICIAL ADMISSION
AND JUDICIAL CONFESSION
-In other words, while the admission is admissible in
evidence, its probative value is to be determined from JUDICIAL ADMISSION JUDICIAL
the whole statement and others intimately related or CONFESSION
-is an admission, verbal -acknowledgement of
connected therewith as an integrated unit.
or written, made by a one’s guilt in the same
-Although acts or facts admitted do not require proof party in the course of case
and cannot be contradicted, however, evidence aliunde the proceedings in the
can be presented to show that the admission was same case
Does not result in Connotes admission of
made through palpable mistake.
liability one’s liability
-The rule is always in favor of liberality in construction May be express or Is always express or
of pleadings so that the real matter in dispute may be implied tacit
submitted to the judgment of the court. Is more of a broader Is only limited to the
scope which includes confession of a person
EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION MADE BY A CO- judicial confession
CONSPIRATOR BECOMES JUDICIAL ADMISSION May be made by any Can only be made by the
IF HE REPEATS THE SAME IN COURT party accused in a criminal
proceeding
-While it is true that statements made by a conspirator
against a co- conspirator are admissible only when
made during the existence of the conspiracy, if the DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN JUDICIAL ADMISSION
declarant repeats the statement in court, his AND EXTRA-JUDICIAL ADMISSION
extrajudicial confession becomes a judicial admission,
JUDICIAL ADMISSION EXTRA-JUDICIAL
making the testimony admissible as to both ADMISSION
conspirators. An admission made in An admission made in
the same case another case or out of
MERE DENIAL FOR LACK OF KNOWLEDGE IS
court admission
INSUFFICIENT: ADMISSION IN THE ANSWER CAN
Need not be proven by Needs to be alleged and
ONLY BE CONTRADICTED BY PALPABLE MISTAKE the party being proved like any other
-A person’s denial for lack of knowledge of things that conclusive on the part of fact.
the admitter, UNLESS it
by their nature he ought to know is not an
was made through
acceptable denial.
palpable mistake or
-An admission in the answer and due execution of the when there is no such
admission made
plaintiff’s actionable document, can only be
contradicted by showing that defendant made such
admission through palpable mistake. INSTANCES WERE JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS CAN
BE MADE:
DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN ADMITTED FACTS AND
PROPOSED FACTS TO BE ADMITTED a. Admissions made in the pleadings
b. Admissions made during pre-trial conference;
-The RoC ha no rule that treats the statements found
c. Admissions made in motions filed before the
under the heading Proposed Evidence as admissions
court;
binding on the party- on the contrary, the RoC has
d. Admissions made by the witness on the
even distinguished between admitted facts and facts
witness stand;
proposed to be admitted during the stage of pre-trial.
e. Admissions made in answer to written request
ALLEGATIONS OF THE PLAINTIFF IN THE for admission;
COMPLAINT ARE DEEMED ADMISSIONS f. Admissions made in the answer in the written
interrogatories;
-A judicial admission is one so made in pleadings filed g. Admissions made in open court during trial
or in the progress of a trial as to dispense with the h. Admission on testimonies, deposition, and
introduction of evidence otherwise necessary to affidavits.
dispense with some rules of practice necessary to be i. Agreement of facts by the parties.
observed and complied with.
2. COVERAGE OF HYPOTHETICAL LIMITATIONS ON THE “IMPLIED ADMISSION
ADMISSION RULE UNDER RULE 16 RULE”
-When a motion to dismiss is filed, the material -The redundant and unnecessarily vexatious nature of
allegations of the complaint are deemed to be petitioner’s request for admission rendered it
hypothetically admitted. ineffectual, futile, and irrelevant so as to proscribe the
operation of the implied admission rule in Section 2,
-This hypothetical admission, extends not only from Rule 26 of the RoC.
the relevant and material facts well pleaded in the
complaint, but also to inferences that may be fairly -There being no implied admission attributable to
deduced from them. (Municipality of Hagonoy Bulacan respondent’s failure to respond, the argument that a
et al vs Hon Simeon Dumdum) preliminary hearing is imperative loses its point.
(Limos vs Spouse Odones, 2010)
3. IMPLIED ADMISSION IN CASE OF A
REQUEST FOR ADMISSION BY ADVERSE REMEDY OF THE PERSON MAKING AN IMPLIED
PARTY UNDER RULE 26 ADMISSION
Sec. 2 Rule 26 of the 1997 Rules of Civil -Motion to be relieved of Implied Admission
Procedure
4. ADMISSIONS IN CASE OF JUDGMENT ON
-provides for the rule on the implied admission by THE PLEADINGS
adverse party of the genuineness of any document.
-A motion for judgment on the pleadings admits the
Sec. 2 Implied Admission- Each of the matters of truth of all the material and relevant allegations of the
which an admission is requested shall be deemed opposing party and the judgment must rest on those
admitted UNLESS, within a period designated in the allegations taken together with such other allegations
request, the party will: as are admitted in the pleadings.
1. File and serve upon the party requesting the -It is proper when an answer fails to tender an issue,
admission a sworn statement either denying or otherwise admits the material allegations of the
specifically the matters of which an admission adverse party’s pleading.
is requested or setting forth in detail the
reasons why he cannot truthfully either admit -However, when it appears that not all the material
or deny those matters. which shall not be less allegations of the complaint were admitted in the
than 15 days after service thereof, or within answer for some of them were either denied or
such further time as the court may allow on disputed, and the defendant has set up certain special
motion, the party to whom the request is defenses which, if proven, would have the effect of
directed files and serves upon the party. nullifying plaintiff’s main cause of action, judgment on
2. Within such further time as the court may the pleadings cannot be rendered. (Municipality of Tiwi
allow on motion. vs Antonio B. Betito)
Objections to any request for admission shall 5. IMPLIED JUDICIAL ADMISSION IN CASE
be submitted to the court by the party requested OF OFFER OF COMPROMISE IN CRIMINAL
within the period for and prior to the filing of his sworn CASES
statement as contemplated in the preceding paragraph Sec. 27, Rule 130 of the RoC provide for the rule
and his compliance therewith shall be deferred until son offer of compromise. It states that—
such objections are resolved, which resolution shall be
made as early as practicable. Sec. 27. Offer of compromise not admissible-
Xxx
WHAT IS AN “IMPLIED ADMISSION RULE” In criminal cases, except those involving quasi-
offenses (criminal negligence) or those allowed by law
-Each matter must be denied specifically under oath to be compromised, an offer of compromise by the
setting forth in detail the reason why he cannot accused may be received in evidence as an implied
truthfully admit or deny. admission of guilt.
-the silence of defendant on the plaintiff’s EFFECT OF AN OFFER OF COMPROMISE IN
request for admission amounts to an implied CRIMINAL CASES
acceptance of the facts set forth therein with the
effect that plaintiff’s claim stood undisputed. (Manzano - may be received in evidence as an implied admission
vs Despabiladeras, 2004) of guilt
6. JUDICIAL ADMISSION IN CASE OF PLEA a. the court shall conduct a searching inquiry into
OF GUILTY TO A LESSER OFFENSE the voluntariness and full comprehension of
the consequences of his plea and
During the arraignment, the accused with the b. shall require the prosecution to prove his guilt
consent of the prosecutor and the offended party may and the precise degree of culpability.
be allowed to make a plea to a lesser offense. c. The accused may present evidence in his
Sec 2 Rule 116 provides that: behalf.
At the arraignment, the accused with the consent of 8. JUDICIAL ADMISSION IN CASE THE
the offended party and the prosecutor, may be allowed ACCUSED PLEADS GUILTY TO A NON-
by the trail court to plead guilty to a lesser offense CAPITAL OFFENSE
which is necessarily included in the offense charged. In case the accused pleads guilty to a non-capital
After arraignment but before trial, the accused offense the court will receive evidence for the
may still be allowed to plead guilty to said lesser determination of the penalties to be imposed. Sec. 4,
offense after withdrawing his plea of not guilty. No Rule 116 provides that:
amendment of the complaint or information is Sec. 4 PLEA OF GUILTY TO NON-CAPITAL
necessary. OFFENSE; RECEPTION OF EVIDENCE,
DISCRETIONARY
NATURE OF THE PLEA OF GUILTY TO A LESSER When the accused pleads guilty to a non-capital
OFFENSE BY THE ACCUSED offense, the court may receive evidence from the
parties to determine the penalty to be imposed.
-In case the accused pleads guilty to a lesser
offense, it is equivalent to a judicial admission of an
offense and all the ingredients necessarily included in -The court is duty bound to receive evidence from the
the offense charged contained in the former parties for the determination of the penalty
information.
FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE COURT IN
REQUISITES IN CASE THE ACCUSED WOULD THE EXERCISE OF DISCRETION IN CASE OF PLEA
PLEAD TO A LESSER OFFENSE OF GUILTY
During the arraignment, the court may allow the -In the exercise of discretion of the judge, he should
accused to make a plea to a lesser offense which is take into consideration the gravity of the offense
necessarily included in the offense charged, subject to charged and the probability that the accused did not
the following rules: actually understand fully the meaning of his plea and
a. The plea to a lesser offense must be made by the consequence thereof. (People vs Acosta, People vs
the accused with the consent of the offended De Mesa)
party and the prosecutor, and
b. 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.
-the presumption of regularity in the -the chain of custody rule requires that the marking of
performance of official duty obtains only where the seized items should be done:
nothing in the records is suggestive of the fact that
the law enforcers involved deviated from the a. in the presence of the apprehended violator
standard conduct of official duty as provided for in and
the law- otherwise, the official act in question is b. immediately upon confiscation to ensure that
irregular on its face, an adverse presumption they are the ones offered in evidence.
arises as a matter of course. (People vs Labag, -while the rule allows the marking of evidence to be
2011) done in the nearest police station, this contemplates a
2. PURPOSE AND FUNCTION OF THE CHAIN case of warrantless searches and seizures.
CUSTODY REQUIREMENT -Failure to comply with the marking of evidence
-ensuring that the integrity and evidentiary value immediately after confiscation constitutes a first gap in
of the seized items are preserved, so much so that the chain of custody.
unnecessary doubts as to the identity of the evidence -Non-compliance with the prescribed procedures does
are removed not necessarily result in the conclusion that the identity
-the unbroken link in the chain of custody also of the seized drugs has been compromised so that an
precluded the possibility that a person, not in the acquittal should follow as long as the prosecution can
chain, ever gained possession of the seized evidence demonstrate that the integrity and evidentiary value of
(People vs Alivio, 2011) the evidence seized has been preserved (People vs
Alcuizar, 2011)
3. UNBROKEN CHAIN OF CUSTODY IN DRUG
CASES IS MANDATORY 7. MANDATORY MARKING OF THE SEIZED
EVIDENCE
-as long as the chain of custody remains unbroken,
even though the procedural requirements provided for -Marking after seizure is the starting point in the
in Sec 21 of RA 9165 was not faithfully observed, the custodial link, thus it is vital that the seized contraband
guilt of the accused will not be affected (People vs is immediately marked because succeeding handlers of
Manlangit, 2011) the specimen will use the markings as reference
(People vs Capuno, 2011)
4. WHEN TO ESTABLISH CHAIN OF CUSTODY
8. EFFECT OF FAILURE TO MAKE AN
-from the time the seized drugs were confiscated and IMMEDIATE MARKING OF THE SEIZED
eventually marked until the same is presented during EVIDENCE
trial (People vs Santiago, 2011)
-will not automatically impair the integrity of chain of
5. FAILURE TO FOLLOW THE PROPER custody as long as the integrity and the evidentiary
PROCEDURE FOR THE CUSTODY value of the seized items have been preserved, as
OFCONFISCTAED DRUGS WOULD RESULT these would be utilized in the determination of the guilt
IN ACQUITTAL or innocence of the accused. (People vs Morales, 2011)
-even prior to the passage of RA 9165, shows that the 9. RULE ON THE TESTIMONY OF THE CHAIN
SC did not hesitate to strike down convictions for OF CUSTODY
failure to follow the proper procedure for the custody
of confiscated dangerous drugs. -testimony about a perfect chain is not always the
standard as it is almost always impossible to obtain an
-Prior to RA 9165, the SC applied the procedure unbroken chain. (People vs Quiamanlon, 2011)
required by Dangerous Drugs Board Regulation No. 3,
S. of 1979, amending Board Regulation No. 7, Series
of 1974.
a. Non-compliance with Section 21, RA 9165 does not -because it serves as the starting point in the custodial
render an accused’s arrest illegal or items link and succeeding handlers of the specimens often
seized/confiscated from him inadmissible (People use the marking as reference.
vs Dela Cruz, 2011)
b. The SC upheld the conviction of the accused by 15. WHERE TO MAKE THE PHYSICAL
ruling that the failure of the policemen to make a INVENTORY OF THE SEIZED DRUGS:
physical inventory and photograph of the two EFFECTS OF NON-COMPLIANCE
plastic containing shabu subject of the case do not -The IRR of RA 9165, provides that the physical
render the confiscated items inadmissible in inventory of the seized items may be done at the
evidence. nearest police station, if the same cannot be done at
Likewise, the failure of the policemen to the place where the items were seized.
mark the two plastic sachets containing
shabu at the place of arrest does not However, non-compliance with these
render the confiscated items inadmissible requirements under justifiable grounds,
in evidence. as long as the integrity and evidentiary
c. The IRR of RA 9165 provides that the physical value of the seized items are properly
inventory of the seized items may be done at the preserved shall not render void and invalid
the seizure and custody of the drugs.
16. EFFECTS OF FAILURE TO STRICTLY a. If the drugs are already in sealed
COMPLY WITH THE PHYSICAL INVENTORY plastic sachets- the police officer
AND PHOTOGRAPHING OF THE SEIZED involved immediately place identifying
DRUGS marks on the cover.
b. If the drugs are not in a sealed
-does not necessarily render an accused’s arrest illegal container- the officer is to place them
or the items seized or confiscated from him in a sealed container, seal the
inadmissible. container and put his marking on the
-In People vs Resurreccion, 2009, it was held that the cover.
failure of the policemen to immediately mark the -In this way there is assurance that the drugs would
confiscated items does not automatically impair the reach the crime laboratory analyst in the same
integrity of chain of custody (People vs Francisco, condition it was seized from the accused (People vs
2011) Ulep, 2011)
17. IDENTIFYING MARKS BY THE POLICE
OFFICER ON THE SEALED PLASTIC
SACHET CONTAINING DRUGS 20. CORPUS DELICTI IN PROSECUTION FOR
ILLEGAL DRUGS
-Since the custody and possession of the drugs usually
change from the time they are seized to the time they -In prosecution involving narcotics and other illegal
are presented in court, it is indispensable that: substances, the substance itself is the corpus
delicti of the offense and the fact of its existence is
a. If the drugs are already in sealed plastic vital to sustain a judgment of conviction beyond
sachets- the police officer involved immediately reasonable doubt.
place identifying marks on the cover.
b. If the drugs are noin a sealed container- the -The chain of custody requirement is essential to
officer is to place them in a sealed container, seal ensure that doubts regarding the identity of the
the container and put his marking on the cover. evidence are removed through the monitoring and
tracking of the movements of the seized drugs from
-In this way there is assurance that the drugs would the accused, to the police, to the forensic chemist and
reach the crime laboratory analyst in the same finally to the court. (People vs Sitco, 2010)
condition it was seized from the accused (People vs
Ulep, 2011) -In other words, the existence of the dangerous
drug is a condition sine qua non for conviction
18. CHAIN OF CUSTODY REQUIREMENTS (People vs De Guzman, 2010)
-In every prosecution for illegal sale of dangerous 21. RULE ON THE PRESUMPTION OF
drug, what is crucial is: REGULARITYIN THE PRESERVATION OF
a. the identity of the buyer and seller SEIZED DRUGS
b. the object, and -the unjustified failure of the police officers to show
c. its consideration. that the integrity of the object evidence was properly
d. The delivery of the thing sold, and the preserved negates the presumption of regularity
payment thereof. accorder to acts undertaken by police officers in the
- The chain of custody requirements that must be pursuit of their official duties. (People vs Navarette,
met are as follows: 2011)
a. Testimony that every link in the chain, from 22. MODE OF AUTHENTICATING THE
the moment it was picked up to the time it is EVIDENCE IN THE CHAINOF CUSTODY
offered in evidence; and REQUIRES PRESENTATION OF THE SEIZED
b. Witnesses should describe the precautions PROHIBITED DRUGS
taken to ensure that there had been no change -the presentation of the seized prohibited rugs as an
in the condition of the item and no opportunity exhibit be preceded by evidence sufficient to support a
for someone not in the custody of the chain to finding that the matter in question is what the
have possession of the item. (Malilin vs People, proponent claims it to be.
2011)
19. RULE ON THE IMMEDIATE PLACING OF -this would ideally cover the testimony about every
MARKINGS ON THE SEIZED DRUGS link in the chain, from seizure of the prohibited drug up
to the time it is offered in evidence, in such a way that
-Since the custody and possession of the drugs usually everyone who touched the exhibit would describe how
change from the time they are seized to the time they and from whom it was received, to include, as much as
are presented in court, it is indispensable that:
possible a description of the condition in which it was f. Probability of Percentage- means the numerical
delivered to the next in link. estimate for the likelihood of parentage of a
putative parent compared with the probability of a
C. DNA EVIDENCE RULE IN RELATION TO random match of 2 unrelated individuals in a given
OBJECT EVIDENCE population.
1. APPLICATION OF THE RULES OF COURT
2. DEFINITION OF TERMS Sec 4 of the DNA Evidence Rule (AM No. 06-11-5-
SC) provides for the requirement of DNA Testing
Sec 3 of the DNA Evidence Rule (AM No. 06-11-5- Order. It states that:
SC) provides for the definition of terms under the
rules. It states that: Sec. 4 APPLICATION FOR DNA TESTING ORDER
Sec. 3 DEFINITION OF TERMS -The appropriate court may, at any time, either motu
proprio or on application of any person who has a legal
a. Biological sample- means any organic material interest in the matter in litigation, order a DNA testing.
originating from a person’s body, even if found in Such order shall issue after due hearing and notice to
inanimate objects, that is susceptible to DNA the parties upon a showing of the following:
testing. This includes blood, saliva and other body
fluids, tissues, hairs and bones. a. A biological sample exists that is relevant to the
b. DNA- means deoxyribonucleic acid which is the case;
chain of molecules found in every nucleated cell of b. The biological sample:
the body. The totality of an individual’s DNA is i. Was not previously subjected to the type of
unique for the individual EXCEPT identical twins. DNA testing now requested; or
DNA is the fundamental building block of a ii. Was previously subjected to DNA testing,
person’s entire genetic make-up. DNA is but the results may require confirmation
found in all human cells and is the same in for good reason.
every cell of the same person. Hence, a c. The DNA testing uses a scientifically valid
person’s DNA profile can determine his technique
identity. d. The DNA testing has the scientific potential to
c. DNA Evidence- constitutes the totality of the DNA produce new information that is relevant to the
profiles, results and other genetic information proper resolution of the case; and
directly generated from DNA testing of biological e. The existence of other factors, if any, which the
samples; court may consider as potentially affecting the
d. DNA Profile- means genetic information derived accuracy or integrity of the DNA testing. This Rule
from DNA testing of biological sample obtained shall not preclude a DNA testing, without need of a
from a person, which biological sample is clearly prior court order, at the behest of any party,
identifiable as originating from that person; including law enforcement agencies, before a suit
e. DNA Testing- means verified and credible or proceeding is commenced.
scientific methods which include the extraction of
DNA from biological samples, the generation of
DNA profiles and the comparison of the information Note:
obtained from the DNA testing of biological
samples for the purpose of determining, with SUBJECT OF THE HEARING IN
reasonable certainty, whether or not the DNA ASCERTAINING THE FEASIBILITY OF DNA
obtained from two or more distinct biological TESTING
samples originates from the same person (direct -The hearing should be confined to ascertaining the
identification) or if the biological samples feasibility of DNA testing with due regard to the
originate from related persons (kinship analysis); standards set in Section 4 (a), (b), (c) and of the
and Rules.
DNA TESTING, ISSUE ON NULLITY OF -this does not mean however that a DNA testing order
MARRIAGE, LEGITIMACY AND FILIATION will be issued as a matter of right if, during the
NOT AVAILABLE IN A PETITION FOR hearing, the said conditions are established.
CORRECTION OF ENTRIES Thus, during the hearing on the motion for
DNA testing, the petitioner must present prima
-In a special proceeding for correction of entry under facie evidence or establish a reasonable
Rule 108, the trial court has no jurisdiction to nullify possibility of paternity.
marriages and rule on legitimacy and filiation.
-the issuance of a DNA testing order remains
-Substantial or contentious alterations may be allowed discretionary upon the court.
only in adversarial proceedings, in which all
interested parties are impleaded and due process is -the court may consider whether there is absolute
properly observed. necessity of for the DNA testing
Sec. 8 of the DNA Evidence Rule (AM No. 06-11- Sec. 10 of the DNA Evidence Rule (AM No. 06-11-
5-SC) provides for the rule on the reliability of the 5-SC) provides for the rule on the post-conviction DNA
DNA Testing Methodology. testing results and the remedy if favorable.