SURVEY OF RECENT CASES IN EVIDENCE

1. Waiver of Objection
When the ground for objection becomes
reasonably apparent, seasonably raised
upon objection, otherwise waived, since
the right to object is merely a privilege
which the party may waive (Sps.
Ambrosio Decaleng, et al. vs. Phil
Episcopal Church, et al., G.R. No.
171209, June 27, 2012).

2. Certified Copy
a. Republic of the Philippines vs.
Lucia M. Gomez, G.R. No.
189021, February 22, 2012
b. NYK International Knitwear
Corp. Phils., et al. vs. NLRC, et
al., G.R. No. 146267, February
17, 2003

3. Best Evidence Rule

When secondary evidence may
be received (People of the Phils.
Vs. Sandiganbayan, et al., G.R.
Nos. 153304-05, February 7,
2012)

 4. A partys declaration of the

completion
of
the
presentation of his evidence
prevents
him
from
introducing further evidence.
Exception. (Republic of the
Phils. Vs. Sandiganbayan, et
al.,
G.R.
No.
152375,
December 16, 2011).

7. Chain of Custody/
Presumption of Regularity
(Peo. Vs. Zaida Kamad y
Ambing, G.R. No. 174198,
January 19, 2010)

 What constitutes sufficient compliance with the Chain

of Custody rule:

As a mode of authenticating evidence, the chain of

custody rule requires that the admission of an Exhibit
be preceded by evidence sufficient to support a
finding that the matter in question is what the
proponent claims it to be. It would include testimony
about every link in the chain, from the moment the
item was picked up to the time it is offered into
evidence, in such a way that every person who
touched the Exhibit would describe how and from
whom it was received, where it was and what
happened to it while in the witnesses possession, the
condition in which it was received and the condition in
which it was delivered to the next link in the chain.
These witnesses would then describe the precaution
taken to ensure that there had been no change in the
condition of the item and no opportunity for someone
not in the chain to have possession of the same.

8. Confession/Admission to Media
(Peo. Vs. Michael A. Hipona, G.R. No.
185709, February 18, 2010)
Confessions made to media are
admissible as they are made in
response to questions by news
reporters, not by the police or other
investigating officer.
Statements
spontaneously made by a suspect to
news reporters on a televised
interview are deemed voluntary and
are admissible in evidence.

9. Filiation
(Ben-Hur Nepomuceno vs.
Arhbencel Ann Lopez,
represented by her mother
Araceli Lopez (G.R. No.
181258, March 18, 2010)

 In its rulings, the Supreme Court has

specified what incriminating acts are
acceptable as evidence to establish
filiation. The issue of paternity still has
to be resolved by such conventional
evidence as the relevant incriminating
verbal and written acts by the putative
father.
Under Art. 278 of the New Civil Code,
voluntary recognition by a parent shall
be made in the record of birth, as well
as, a statement before a court of
record, or in any authentic writing.
To be effective, the claim of filiation
must be made by the putative father
himself and the writing must be the
writing of the putative father. Standing

10.
Cancellation
Correction of Entry
Local Civil Registrar

or
in

(In Re : Petition for cancellation

and correction of entries in the
record of birth. Emma K. Lee vs.
Court of Appeals, et al., G.R. No.
177861, July 13, 2010)


11. Equipoise Rule
(G.R. No. 161083, August 3,
2010)

 Under the Equipoise rule, where the

evidence on an issue of fact is in
equipoise, or there is doubt on which
side the evidence preponderates, the
party having the burden of proof loses.
The equipoise rule finds application if
the inculpatory facts and circumstances
are capable of 2 or more explanations,
one of which is consistent with the
innocence of the accused and the other
consistent with his guilt, for then the
evidence does not suffice to produce a
conviction.
The equipoise rule has been generally
applied when the parties already

12. Positive Identification- (People

vs. Delfin Caliso [G.R. No. 183830,
October 19, 2011])

In every criminal prosecution,

the identity of the offender, like the
crime itself, must be established by
proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Indeed, the first duty of the
Prosecution is not to prove the
crime but to prove the identity of
the criminal, for even if the
commission of the crime can be
established, there can be no
conviction without proof of identity
of the criminal beyond reasonable

The identification of the malefactor,

to be positive and sufficient for
conviction, does not always require
direct evidence from an eyewitness;
otherwise,
no
conviction
will
be
possible in crimes where there are no
eyewitnesses.
Indeed,
trustworthy
circumstantial evidence can equally
confirm the identification and overcome
the
constitutionally
presumed
innocence of the accused. Thus, the
Court has distinguished two types of
positive identification in People vs.
Gallarde, to wit: (a) that by direct
evidence, through an eyewitness to the
very commission of the act; (b) that by
circumstantial evidence, such as where

The test to determine the moral

certainty of an identification is its
imperviousness to scepticism on
account of its distinctiveness. To
achieve such distinctiveness, the
identification of evidence should
encompass
unique
physical
features or characteristics, like the
face, the voice, the dentures, the
distinguishing marks or tattoos on
the body, fingerprints, DNA, or any
other physical facts that set the
individual apart from the rest of
humanity.

13. Judicial Admission

(Sps. Manuel and
Florentina Del Rosario vs.
Gerry Roxas Foundation,
Inc. [G.R. No. 170575, June
8, 2011])

Section 4, Rule 129 of the Rules of Court provides

that:
Sec. 4. Judicial admissions. An admission,
verbal or written, made by a party in the course
of the proceedings in the same case, does not
require proof. . . .
"A judicial admission is one so made in
pleadings filed or in the progress of a trial as to
dispense with the introduction of evidence
otherwise necessary to dispense with some rules
of practice necessary to be observed and complied
with." Correspondingly, "facts alleged in the
complaint are deemed admissions of the plaintiff
and
binding
upon
him."
"The
allegations,
statements or admissions contained in a pleading
are conclusive as against the pleader."

14. Electronic Evidence

(Rustan P. Ang vs. CA, et
al., G.R. No. 182835, April
20, 2010)
Rule on Electronic Evidence does
not apply to criminal cases. It
applies only to civil actions,
quasi-judicial and administrative
proceedings

15. DNA (Jesse U. Lucas

vs. Jesus S. Lucas, G.R.
No. 190710, June 6,
2011
Is a prima facie showing
necessary before a court can
issue a DNA testing order?

16. Rico Rommel Atienza

vs. Board of Medicine and
Editha Sioson, G.R. No.
177407. February 9, 2011
Admissibility should not be
equated with probative weight