REMEDIAL LAW REVIEWER vals Received from third person not acting in behalf for as agent ofthe client; and 5. Made in the presence of third parties who are strangers to the attorney-client relations ‘The period to be considered is that date when the privileged communication was made by the client to the attorney in relation to either a crime committed in the past of with respect to a crime intended ta he committed Inthe future Communications regarding a crime aleeady committed made by the offender to an attorney, consulted as such, are privileged communications Contemplated criminal acts are not covered, The privilege DOES NOT attach when the attorney is a conspirator. ‘The privilege DOES NOT apply when all do it to either affirm or deny the client to the court. Purpose facts, circumstances, and symptoms," ‘untraimeled by: apprehension of ther subsequont and enforced dslosure ‘and publication on the witness stand, to the end that the ! physician may form a correct opinion, and be r safely and efficaciously to treat his patiertt, REQUISITES: “Se 1. The physician is authorized to practice medicine,” surgery, or obstetries; 2 The information was acquired or the advice or treatment was een by him in his professional capacity for the purpose of treating and curing the patient; 3. The information, advice or treatment, if revealed, would blacken the reputation ofthe patient; and 4. The privilege is invoked in a chil case, whether patients party or not. It is not necessary that the physician-patient relationship, was created through the voluntary act ofthe patient. ‘The privilege extends to all forms of communications as well as to the professional observations and examinations of the patient ETL OPERATIONS 2010 “be objected to Gn the ground of priviege Ache ity Guevara Atty. Arroy Ait. Savedor Atty, Viruan judge Bnifodo; Heads: Glrissa Faylona, Maria Kristina Understudy: Roxanne Tadique, Alexis Gmagata; Vohinteors: Grace Escosi, ina Bionka Siva, Nash Marchomsalie, KSuarer. ‘THE PRIVILEGE DOES NOT APPLY: 11. The communication was not given in confidence; 2. The communication is irrelevant to the professional employment; 3. The communication was made for an unlawful purpose, as wher itis intended for the commission or concealment of a crime; 4, The information was intended to be made public; and 5. There was a walver of the privilege either by provisions of contract orlaw. The physician may testiy if he confined himsetf merely to the ascertainment of the nature and character of the Injury for the purpose of reporting them to the defendant, ‘The burden of proving that such relation does not exist is ‘upon the person objecting it. Death ofthe patient does not extinguish the relation, 28 of the Rules of Court, the results of the Unde id. méntal examination of 2 person, when physical ordered by the court, are intended to be made public, they can be divulged in that proceeding and cannot entra intended to be diged in cour, aside from the pp fac the doctors services were nat for purposes af medical ‘treatment Bus SEE j jot a waiver of the privilege by provision of law Section 4 of said Rule 28 under which if the mined obtains a report on said examination or the deposition of the examiner, he thereby waives ‘any privilege regarding any other examination of said physical or mental condition conducted or to be ‘conducted on him by any other physician, is four ‘Waiver of the privilege by contract may be found in stipulations in ife insurance policies. wunications to Minister or Priest Peenitent REQuismTES: 1. That the same were made pursuant to religious duty enjoined in the course of discipline of the sect or denomination to which they belong; and 2 Must be confidential and penitential in character. Example: under seal of the confessional tis the person making the confession who can invoke the privilege. 270valk Oem REQuisiTes: 1. That it was made to the public officer in officiel confidence; 2 That public Interest would suffer by the Asclosure of such communication, as in the case of State secrets. Where no public interest will be prejudiced, this rule will ‘aot apply. PUBLIC INTEREST — something in which the community at large has some pecuniary interest by which their legal rights or labilties are affected, ‘Other instances of Privilege * Under RA 53 25 amended by RA1477, the’ eattor or duly accredited reporter of ay newspaper, ‘magazine or periodical of general n cannot be compelled to reveal the soured of any news report. or information appearing in std coo was related in confidence to him unless th proceedings shall ‘communications and shall ot be used as evideree in" the National Labor Relations “Commission, and! cconciiators and similar officials shall ‘court or body regarding any matter Conciliation proceedings conducted by them ‘+ Voters cannot be compelled to reveal their ballots. ‘+ Trade Secrets will be covered by this privilege. © Prosecutor is not to be compelled to dispose the identity of the informer unless the informer is already known to the accused and when the identity of the informer is vital. GENERAL RULE: Bank deposits may not be disclosed 2. Impeachment under the Constitution; 3 Upon order of the court in case of bribery or dereliction of duty; 4 When the subject matteris the deposits; 5. Anti-grat cases. enEee 2. Testimonial Privlere Section 25, Parental and filial Privilege This section is an expanded amendment of the former provision found in Section 20 (e), 2 disqualification by reason of relationship which, in turn, was reproduced from ‘Ast. 315 ofthe Gil Code. {t was not correctly a rule of disqualification, as the doscondant was not incompetent or disqualified to testify against his ascendants, but was actually a privilege to testify, hence it was referred to as “filial privilege”. However, under the Family Cade, the descendant may be compelled to testify against his parents and grandparents, if such testimony is indispensable in prosecuting 2 crime ‘against the descendant by one parent against the other fart. 215). Under the present formulation, both parental and fil .plévleges ‘re granted to any person, which privileges _ against compulsory testimony he can invoke in any case ES, em Sree ra re eae “Reason for the Rsle The reason for the rule is to preserve “family cohesion” ) deploring the latk of this provision under former laws 2 ee Violence to the most sacred sentiments between ,- Methbers of te same family.” Pieler ere Section 26. Admission of @ party ADMISSION ~ any statement of fact made by @ party ‘against his interest or unfavorable to the conclusion for which he contends or i inconsistent with the facts alleged by tim. It is a voluntary acknowledgment in express terms or by implication, by a party interest or by another by whose statement he is legally bound, against his interest, of the existence or truth of a fact in dispute material to the issue (Francisco). EXPRESS ADMISSIONS are those made in definite, certain and unequivocal language. Advisers: ity, Guevarra Aty. Arroyo Atty. Sohador Ay, Vinkaon Judge Bonifacio; Heads: Clarssa Faylona, aria Kristina Se Understudy: Rexanne Tadique, Alexis Cimagala; Volunteers: Grace Escosia, Ina Bianka Sil, Nash Marohomsalc, K Suarez‘Example: Action for personal injures caused by a colision between P's carriage and 0's automobile. D was net in the ‘automobile when the accident occurred. D’s son was driving the automobile, having taken it without express permission from D. Before tral O told P's husband that he had bought the automobile for the pleasure of his family ‘and for business; that members ofthe farnily might take it without asking; and that so faras the lability extended (D) was responsible. On the bases of this express admission, verdict was rendered for P. Ukewise, defendant duly executes and signs a document before 2 notary public Stating therein that hs wife isthe true and absolute owner Of the lands which are the subject matter of the litigation. ‘Said document is an express admission that defendant is not the owner of the land, and admissible against him. IMPLIED ADMISSIONS are those which may be inferred from the acts, declarations or omission of 2. partynre Therefore, an admission may be implied froqtondvct, statement of silence of a party. Examples: The payment of interest of’ debt isan implied. admission ofthe existence ofthe Ge ‘The repair made by the landlord that itis not the duty of the tes ‘The immediate fight of the ‘other country is the implied conscioysness stansing yy orga e Failure to answer a letter does not give rise to an iplied: admission as to the truth of the stat contained therein, since there i no duty upon the reply. However, where good faith requires addressee state his postion frankly so that the addressee bie not misled, acquiescence may be inferred from now. deni Failure to return or object to a bill or statement sent by the debtor, within a reasonable time, is competent evidence (but rebuttable) that the account is correct. Undue delay in the enforcement of a right és strongly Persuasive evidence that the clalm lacks merit because itis human nature for a person to assert his rights most strongly when they are threatened or invaded, Delay in instituting 2 criminal prosecution, unless satisfactorily explained, creates suspicion about. the ‘motive of the supposed offended party and gives rise to reasonable doubt of the guilt ofthe defendant. CENTRAL BAR OPERATIONS 2010 Advisers: Aity. Guovarra Atty. Arroyo Atty, Savedor Atty. Vinluan, Implied admission cennot be inferred from an act of repairing a defect that caused an injury. A person may have exercised all the care that the law required and yet, in the light of his new experience, after an unexpected ‘accident has occurred, and as a measure of extreme caution, he may adopt additional safeguards. ‘Admission and Confession Distinguished — Telewohves an offactwhich doesnot | acknowledgment of euit or involve an Yabiey acknowledgement of git orbit Rinse express or et [Mit be express ‘May be made by third | Can be made only by the persons ray himself and in some - instance, are admissible Pa, against hiscoaconed ‘The rule that the aét, declaration or omission of a party Igy be given in evidence against him is besed upon the jan that no man could declare anything against of isa rule that a “statement Is not competent as an admission where it does not, under a reasonable {{ construction, appear to admit ‘They must be categorical and definite; ‘They must be knowingly and voluntarily made; They must be adverse to the admitter's interests, otherwise it would be self-serving and ‘inadmissible, ‘An admission may be introduced in evidence in two ways: 1 2 Independent evidence Impeaching evidence Independent evidence — admissions are original evidence ‘and no foundation is necessary for thelr introduction In evidence If the admission was made orally, it may be proved by any ‘competent witness who heard them or by the declarant himself. The law does not require impossibilities. if the witness states the substance of the conversation or declaration, the admission of his testimony is not erroneous. Burge Bonifacio; Head: Carissa Fay, Marla Kitna Santos; ‘Understudy: Roxanne Tadique, Alexis Cimagala; Volunteers: Grace Excosia, tna Bianka Silva, Nash MarchornsalicK Suarerae eg REMEDIAL LAW REVIEWER Impeaching evidence — a proper foundation must be lid {or the impeaching questions, by calling attention of such party to his former statement so as to eve him an ‘opportunity to explain before such admissions are offered inevidence. Example to illustrate the rules regarding the introduction of admissions in evidence either as an Independent or 2¢ impeaching evidence: P sues D for 2 balance due and unpaid for groceries furnished. The claim is for P175 due on July 31. D disputes the amount due, and offers a statement of account sent by P in September reading “Balance due — P75". This i& admissible and may be presented as part of the evidence inchiet of 0. ‘Action was brought by broker P for commissions on stock shares bought and sold for D. All the transactions been made through O's office manager. P.. interest at 8% was understood to he chargé monthly on balances. The manager testifies that theffterest wastobe 3 tow oes Re oD de containing the sentence “as usual th yor, expec toh 8% interest on monthly balances. 1D had ‘ans a5 @ witness and had testified ‘manager's statements as to the ur Zwei In6eESS/ or P's counsel to ask Dif bead wtten sich eter, before introducing itn rebuttal a D's asin foe prance tema Admissions may be verbal or written, express of tacts. Judicial or exrajudia S : JUDICIAL ADMISSION s {tis one made in connection with a judicial proceeding in Which itis offered; while an extrajudicial admission is any ‘other admission (may be out of court or in a judicial proceeding other than the one under consideration), NOTE: Section 26 and 32 of this Rule refer to extrajudicial admissions. Testimony of the accused in a particular case to the effect that he was married to the victim is an admission against his penal interest and will sustain his conviction even in the absence of independent evidence to prove such marriage | —Aabiers Atty. Guevara Atty. Aroy Atty. Salvador Atty. Vian Judge Bonieco; Head bee claire the ea OPERATIONS 2010 ‘Admission v. Declaration Against interest ‘Anadmission need not be | The decaration against against one's proprietary | interest musthave been ‘or pecuniary interest, ‘made aginst the akhough, of course, it wil | proprietary o pecuniary realy enhance its Interest of the parties probative weight it be so made Wises party hima)” Whasthave been iad by {isa primary evidence | person whois either | Sree jel The decioration against interest mast have been ‘made ante Iter motom SELE-SERMING DECLARATION is one which has been made -trajeticllythe party to favor bis interests. is sot vital objettion to the admission of this kind of B “efeence ists hearsay character. To permit introduction “would open the door to frauds and perjuries. 7 > open the door to fraud and fabrication of ‘testimony. 3. The fact that if testified to by one other than the declarant, they would be hearsay. Self serving testimony refers to extrajudicial statement of 2 party which is being urged for admission in cour. It does not include his testimony as a witness in court. I fas no application to a court declaration. Where the statement was not made in anticipation of a future litigation, the same cannot be considered self-serving. The mere fact of death alone does not render competent self-serving conduct, admissions or dedarations of the deceased person during his life-time. Unswom declarations by others for the declarant would bbe inadmissible Garis Feyiona, Maria Kristina Santos; Understudy: Roxanne Tadique, Alexts Cimagata; Volunteers: Grace Escosa, ina Bianka Silva, Nash Marohomsali,K Suarez —REMEDIAL LAW REVIEWER A fa N E igi. Persons whose unsworn declarations in behalf of a party are not admissible in favor ofthe later ‘L._Agants,as regards thelr principals; 2. A co-defendant or co-partner, as regards the other; A guardian as regards his word; ‘A principat as regards his surety; ‘A husband or wife as regards his or her spouse; An employee, as regards his employer; Officers of the corporation; Publi officers as regards public corporation; Predecessors in tite, as regards am owner of property. Self-serving declarations made by a party are admissible in is own bebatf in the following 1. When they fornt part of res gestae, including spontaneous statements and verbal ats; ee aD TIONS 2010 Examples of Admissions Flight from justice is an admission by conduct and circumstantial evidence of consciousness gut. Evidence of attempts to suppress evidence, as by destruction of documentary evidence, Is admissible under ‘the same rationale. ‘The act of reporting a machine, bridge, or other facility after an injury has been sustained therein is not an Implied admission of negligence by conduct. Its merely 3 measure of extreme caution by adopting additional safeguards since, despite due care and diligence, an unexpected accident can still occur. ‘Section 27. Offer of compromise not admissible = an agreement made between two or 2. When they are in the form of complai COMPROMISE crema tpan eta ee tes as a settlement af the matters in dispute. 3. When they are part of a confess@h offered by the prosecution, that his fabrication, in which case even of & self serving! character, admitted, provided they were ‘when a mative to misrepresent 4. Where ey ate fred the Spine The ~ objections which have Ben Bointed but donot ‘ppl agtinst the reception of the statements of ‘one party as evidence when such statements are ny is @ recent 1 pron declaration, aa Gio 27 . > awaffetiot compromise is not an admission of f yh not adie n erdene gat the except those ivohing quastoffenses ‘{elimioal negligince) or those allowed by law to be compromised, ap offer of compromise by the accused may {9} be received in eydence as on implied admission of gui offered by his adversary. Every wtten 3 fbn statements of a party in his-own favor ean bed”) fGen successfully turned when suchistatements are!) offered against him; 5. When they are offered without evidence cannot afterward be objected to as Incompetent. ‘An invoice prepared by a merchant in the city covering ‘merchandise consigned to his agent in the province, and a letter of said merchant requesting confirmation of the receipt of said merchandise by the agent, are not self serving if they had been prepared not in anticipation of litigation in which they were presented as evidence. Diaries, as a general rule, are inadmissible because they are self-serving in nature, UNLESS they have the nature of books of account; but it has been held that an entry in diary, being in the nature of a declaration, if it was against interest when made, is admissible. Advisers: Atty. Guevarra Atty. Arroyo Atty, Salvador, Atty. Vial offer of compromise is not an admission of any Kability and is not admissible in evidence against an offeror. EXCEPTIONS: 1. An express admission of liability made during ‘negotiations for a compromise; Express and unqualified admission of febtedness accompanying an offer of compromise; ‘An admission of the correctness of an account or ‘of specific items; 4. Admission involving interest in property; 5. Admission affecting ability for atort. ft is the policy of the law to favor the settlement of sputes, to foster compromise, and to promote peace. If every offer to buy peace could be used as evidence against him who presents it, many settlements would be Prevented, and unnecessary litgation would be produced and prolonged. an Judge Bonifacio; Heads: Carissa Faylona Sento; Understudy: Rexanne Tadiqve, Alesis Gmagala; Vounteers: Grace Escosia, Ina Bianka Silva, Nash Marohomsafc, K SuarezREMEDIAL LAW REVIEWER While a bare offer to compromise does not constitute an ‘admission on the part of the person making it, the fact that a writing contains an offer of compromise does not render it inadmissible In evidence if it is competent ‘evidence for ather purposes. Generally, an admission of fact pertinent to an issue between the parties, which forms part of an offer of ‘compromise or was made in the course of negotiations to effect a settlement is admissible on the trial of such issue. Except if itis 2) 50 closely connected with the offer of ‘compromise as to be inseparable therefrom, or b) i 3 tentative or hypothetical statement as distinguished from @ definite statement of fact, or ¢) is expressly made without prejudice, or d) indicates that it is made in Confidence that a compromise will be affected. An exes non of aiy made rng regions fora compromise hasbeen held sdnissble. Example: é ‘pedestrian sean over by achive, he is injured tater on the dever approached the pedestian end Said 5 becase he was crunk tat gh an fered» pmen The pedestlan may not introduc the fact ath was. offered money to show that a can introduce the fact that the dr oe In criminal cases, an offer of en Suntan of gu athough ne acteca mays eared to prove that such offer was not {made ‘tinder Consciousness of guilt but merely to avoid the risks of 2 criminal action against him. (GENERAL RULE: No compromise may be entered ‘regard the penal action. EXCEPTION: Compromise may be entered into with respect to the civil lability. |n criminal cases where compromise is allowed by law (e.g. opium or usury cases) no implied admission of guilt arises against the accused who makes an offer to compromise. In prosecution for violation of the internal revenue law, such offers of compromise are nat admissible in evidence as the law provides that the payment of any internal revenue tax may be compromised, and all_criminal violations may likewise be compromised, except those already filed in court and those involving fraud. Criminal labilty s extinguished in @ RAPE CASE if there CENTRAL BAR eT Eat ‘s sini i Set cA ‘An offer to compromise via a monetary consideration and not to marry the victim, is an implied admission of uit. ‘The attempt of the parents of the accused to settle the ‘ease with the complainant was considered an implied admission of gut. ‘The SC has held that an offer of marriage by the accused, during the investigation of the rape case é ako admission of guit. NOTE: What matters is the fact of mardage and not the intent behind the marriage. Example, it does not matter whether the accused married the victim for the reason of ‘exculpating him from criminal lability. ‘The amendment regarding the admissibility of a plea of guilty ister withdrawn or an unaccepted offer to plead _plty to a lesser offense is a consequence of the present ‘finsions in criminal procedure on ples-baraiing. One Of the pgactcal reasons advanced is that encouragement of negotiations; between the defense and prosecution to pleas requires fexbitty in making them without prejudice. court allow the acused to change plea when the ‘eee wa made morose. Criminal cases involving criminal negigence, or the quasi frees comet n At. 65 of the RPG ae owed ised under the amendment to this section. ‘of settlement is not an implied admission ‘offer to pay or the actual payment of the medical, hospital or other expenses by reason of the victim's Injuries is not admissible to prove civil or criminal liability ‘therefore. Such humanitarian acts or charitable responses should be encouraged and rewarded, instead of being iscoureged or penalized by being considered as admissions of liability. troublesome question arises when an express admission, of lability is coupled with an offer of assistance. Some ‘courts have stated that both should be admitted since the ‘express admission insured that the offer or tender of assistance was ‘not merely an act of benevolence, but some admission of faut.” f the admission can be disclosed without mentioning the furnishing, offering or promise to pay medical expenses, then it should be admitted.Section 28. Admissibility by third party Unless he assents thereto, a party to an action cannot be affected by the admission of 9 person who does not ‘occupy toward him any relation of privity, agency or joint interest. ‘The act, declaration or omission of another is generally irelevant, and that in justice @ person should not be bound by the acts of mere unauthorized strangers, ‘The rule is welFsettied that a party is not bound by any ‘agreement of which he has no knowledge and to which he has not given his consent and that his rights cannot be prejudiced by the declaration, act or omission of another, ‘except by virtue ofa particular relation between them. This section refers to the first branch of the rule of "RES INTER ALIOS ACTA ALTER! NOCERE NON DEBET.” It is eT OPERATIONS 2010 3. Such act or declaration must have been made during the existence of the partnership, agency or joint interest. Rules on Partnerships ‘The declaration of one partner, not made in the presence of his corpartner, are not competent to prove the ‘existence of a partnership between them as against such ‘other partner. The existence of a partnership i cannot be established by general reputation, humor or hearsay Even where one partner is shown to be hostile to ‘another, the admissions of such first partner may be received, although, of course, such hastily may affect the question of weight of the evidence. The declarations of a deceased partner, relating to the partnership business, are _adiissible against his survivors, corolary known a the second branch of the ale in Section 34 of Rule 130. (7 Resins or asin mac by 4 ptr she the cerHONS: : 1. Third person is a partner,“agent, joint Joint dettor or has a joint faterest with {Section 29); & aes 2. Conmconspitator ee 3 Pr of pry See 3 e Basis of the Exceptions A third party may be so united in interest e ‘opponent that the other person's admissions may be receivable against the party himself. The term “privy | the orthodox catchword forthe relation. =. Section 28, Admission by co-partner or agent ‘The admission of one partner is received against another (on the ground that they are identified in interest , and that each is agent for the other and that the acts or declarations of one during the existence of the Partnership, while transacting its business and within the scope of the business, are evidence against the others ReQuismtes: 1, That the partnership, agency, or joint interest is established by evidence other than the act or declaration — partnership relation must be shown; 2. The act or declaration Is within the scope of the partnership, agency or joint interest ~ the fact that ‘each has individually made a substantially similar ‘admission does not render the aggregate admission Competent against the firm, this is with regard to on-partnership affair; the may “Advisers: Atty. Guevarra Atty. Arroyo,Atly. Salvador Atty. Vinluan Judge Bonlfad; Heads Charissa Fayiona, Maria Kristina Santos, kution of the partnership are not competent against the in the absence of prior authority or ‘Subsequent ratification, even though such declarations to meters pending at the te of dsolton. With respect tothe relevant substante provisions on “these-matiers,gefer to the Chil Code provisions on partners, agents co-owners and solidary debtors. NOTE: As @ rule statements made after a partnership has Bh Beem ‘do not fall within this exception, but where 8 the ad are made in connection with the winding. Partnership affairs, said admissions are stil nisdble as the partner is acting 2s an agent of his co- In said winding up. up of Rules on Agents. What's done by an agent is done by the principal through hhim, as through a mere instrument. ‘The admission or declaration of an agent subsequent to a transaction in controversy, or after the agency has terminated are not binding upon, or evidence against his Drincipal But when the admission or declaration is made at the time of the transaction, or during his employment, when it pertains to the matter in hand, and was done within the scope of his employment, his admissions and declarations are competent, though not conclusive against his principal. When a party to any proceeding expressly refers to any thier person for an answer on a particular subject in ‘dispute, such answer, if restricted to the subject matter in Felation to which the reference is made, &, in general, Understudy: Rexanne Tadique, Alexis Cimagala; Volunteers: Grace Escasa, Ina Bianka Silva, Nash Marohomsate K suaret‘evidence against said party, because he makes such third ‘person his accredited agent for the purpose of giving such ‘Admissions of a third person are receivable in evidence ‘against the party who has expressly referred another to him for information in regard to an uncertain or disputed matter. ‘But such a reference does not make the person referred to an agent for the purpose of making general admissions. The declarations are not evidence, unless strictly with the subject matter in relation to which reference is made. When the reference was not made to any particular person but in general, the rule above-stated is not ‘applicable, ‘Admissions by counsel are admissible against the the former acts In representation and a5 an, client, subject to the limitation that the amount to a compromise or confession, ‘of the ‘should not Fiudement Rules on persons with ajont| The piste lat deter ae community of interest pou secorang fo ts mening inthe ceed which the provision was taken hit 3 ‘mancomunada. ¥ The qontum tne te let a ebelt the application ofthe rule. ts the fact of joint interest, ‘not the sie ofthe fractional part, which thes liable to the plaintiff in the same defendants are fable, the extent to which They re bed aa °. by his admission cannot be measured or graduated by the quantity of his interest in the contract. Section 30. Admission by conspirator Under the Revised Penal Code, a conspiracy exists when, two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission ofa felony and decide to commitit. How Conspiracies are Proved. Conspiracies are generally proved by a number of indefinite acts, conditions, and circumstances which vary according to the purposes to be accomplished. If it be proved that the defendants pursued by their acts the same object, one performing one part and another performing Part of the same, so as to complete it, with a view to the ‘attainment of the same object, one will be justified in the . es ed OPERATIONS 2010 ia ~ Advisers: ity Guevara At. Arroyo Atty, Salvador Ait. Vision Judge Bonifacio; Heads: Gasca Fayona, Maria conclusion that they were engaged in the conspiracy to effect that object. NOTE: This rule applies only to extrajudicial acts or statements and not to testimony given on the witness. stand at the trial where the party adversely affected thereby has the opportunity to crossexamine the declarant. Hence, the requirement that the conspiracy ‘must preliminary be proved by evidence other than the ‘conspirator’s admission apples only to extrajudicial, but otto judicial, admissions. REQUISITES: 11. Such conspiracy is shown by evidence allunde ~ conspiracy must be established by prima facie proof in the judgment of the court; 2. The admission was made during the existence of the conspiracy — after the termination of a ‘conspiracy, the statements of one conspirator may not be accepted as evidence against any of the other conspirators; and the admission related to the conspiracy ise _ Should relate to the common object. © Theselgre not required in admisions during the trial a5 the co-accused can cross-examine the declarant and besides these are admissions ater the cogspracy has ended. Ricect root is ot essential to prove conspiracy the conspigsty may be inferred from: acts ofthe accused; ‘The confessions of the accused; or Prima facie proof thereof. ‘The concurrence of minds essential to conspiracy may be Inferred where the parties are apparently pursuing the same object, whether acting separately ot together, by ‘common or different means, leading to the same lawful result. A common purpose is inferable from concerted action converging to a definite objective and whether or ‘ot the parties meet, or confer and formulate their plans. Conspiracy must be shown to exist as dearly and ‘convincingly as the commission of the offense itself. ‘A person charged with conspiracy is presumed to be innocent, and the burden i on the prosecution to establish his gut, ‘The rule of evidence with regard to conspiracy fs founded fon the principle which apples to agencies and ‘Understudy: Roxanne Tadique, Alexis Cemsagala; Volunteer: Groce Escosia, Ina Blanka Silva, Nash Marchomsalic, K Suarer 7