Evidence Cases Numbers 87-90 would naturally differ in various
details. The fact that witnesses
87. People of the Philippines vs Arevalo and Valenzuela gave varying Nicanor Llanes and Leandro Llanes testimonies as to the dying declaration GR NO. 116986, February 4, 2000 of the victim does not indicates that they are lying. In fact, these Kapunan, J.: inaccuracies even suggest that the witness are telling the truth and have FACTS: not been rehearsed. Besides, a witness testifying on the dying The victim allegedly made an declaration of the deceased need not ante mortem statement naming the reproduce exactly the words of the appellants as his assailants and the latter as long as he is able to give its trial court convicted the appellants substance. solely on account of the said dying declaration. 88. Heirs of Ignacio Conti and Rosario Cuario vs Court of Appeals, et al Vivencio Arevalo testified that the appellants were the one who shot GR No. 118464, December 21, 1998 the victim in accordance with the victims ante mortem statement. This Bellosillo, J.: was corroborated by Dominador Valenzuela. FACTS:
The accused contend that there Lourdes Sampayo and Ignacio
is inconsistency with respect to the Conti, married to Rosario Cuario were identity of appellant Leandro Llanes. the co-owners of the property in They claim that considering that litigation. witnesses Arevalo and Valenzuela The private respondents filed an approached the victim at the same action for partition, claiming that they time, why was it that Arevalo declared are collateral relatives of Lourdes that the victim said that he was shot Sampayo. However, Ignacio Conti and by his cousin alan and uncle nicandro. Rosario Cuario refused the partition on ISSUE: the ground that private respondents failed to produce any document to Whether or not a witness prove that they are the rightful heirs of testifying the dying declaration of the Lourdes Sampayo. The private deceased should be stated in exact respondents presented their baptismal words. certificates together with a photocopy of the birth certificate. The petitioners HELD: moved to strike in the record the photocopy of the birth certificates No. It is a well settled rule that which was granted by the lower court. different witnesses testifying on the circumstances of a criminal event ISSUE: Whether or not baptismal The accused alleged that Police certificates is sufficient to prove Inspector Caser lacked adequate filiation of the private respondents. training and expertise in ballistic; they claim that his opinion on the test HELD: bullets and cartridges matched the Yes. Under Article 172 of the slugs and cartridges recovered from Family Code, proof of filiation of the scene of the crime was not legitimate child shall be proved by a reliable. record of birth or the parents ISSUE: admission of such legitimate filiation of such legitimate filiation or private Whether or not Police Inspector document duly signed by the parent. Caser is qualified as an expert witness. In the absence of such documents, the filiation may be proved by other HELD: means allowed by the Rules of Court Yes. An expert witness is one and Special Laws. Such other proof who belongs to the profession or may be a baptismal certificate a calling to which the subject matter of judicial admission, a family bible which inquiry relates and who possesses his has been entered, common special knowledge on questions on reputation respecting his pedigree, which he proposes to express an admission by silence, the testimonies opinion. There is no definite standard of witnesses and other kinds of proof of determining the degree of skill or admissible under Rule 130 of the Rules knowledge that a witness must of Court. Thus, the private possess in order to testify as an respondents have proven their filiation expert. It is sufficient that the by presenting their baptismal following factors be present: certificates and therefore entitles them of the property owned by the a. Training and education; decendent. b. Particular, first hand 89. People of the Philippines vs familiarity with the facts Albert Abriol, et al. of the case; and
GR No. 123137, October 17, 2001 c. Presentation of
authorities or standards Quisumbing, J.: upon which his opinion is FACTS: based.
The accused were found guilty In the case at bar, Police
beyond reasonable doubt of murder inspector Cesar qualifies as a and violation of PD 1866 on illegal ballistic expert. He is a licensed possession of firearms. criminologist, trained at the Ballistics Command and Laboratory Center in Fort Bonifacio, in the PNP Crime The medico-legal, Dr. Rolando Laboratory in Camp Crame, and Victoria, who examined MELODY, in the National Bureau of found no extra-genital physical injuries Investigation. He had previously nor hymenal lacerations, and while her testified as an expert witness in hymen was intact, it admitted a 2.8- at least twenty-seven (27) centimeter diameter tube without murder and homicide cases all producing any injury. Dr. Victoria thus over the country.42 An expert concluded that MELODY's hymenal witness need not present orifice could admit an adult male comparative microphotographs organ in full erection without suffering of test bullets and cartridges to injury, and that it was possible she support his findings. engaged in sexual engaged in sexual Examination under a intercourse. comparison microscope showing that the test bullet and the The accused- appellant alleged evidence bullet both came from that if indeed MELODY was raped, and the same gun is sufficient. three times at that, it was highly Moreover, the ballistician improbable that no physical injuries on conclusively found similar her genital area were detected. He characteristic markings in the thus doubted the expertise of the evidence, test cartridges and examining physician, Dr. Rolando slugs. Victoria, because it was unscientific for a doctor to opine that rape could have Hence, Police Inspector been committed without physical Caser has sufficiently satisfied findings to support such opinion. the factors to testify as an expert. ISSUE:
Whether or not the medico-legal
is an expert and hence qualified to 90. People of the Philippines vs testify Rizalino Fundano HELD: GR No. 124737, June 26, 1998 Yes. In Dr. Victoria's case, the Davide, Jr., J.: prosecution examined his past and present employment, his experience FACTS: and duties as an NBI medico-legal The RTC found the accused- officer, and the lectures and seminars appellant was found guilty beyond he attended and conducted. 44 An reasonable doubt of three counts pf expert witness may be impeached, or rape of his own daughter Melody the weight of his opinion lessened, by Fundano. introducing evidence or pointing out paradoxes in his testimony; and the cross-examination of such a witness, great latitude is allowed the examining counsel to test the credibility of the expert for the guidance of the court. 45 In the instant case, defense counsel's lone remark was that "the prosecution has not established the qualification of" Dr. Victoria, which, by itself, did not impair the expertise already established by the prosecution.
WENCESLAO PASCUAL, in His Official Capacity As Provincial Governor of Rizal, Petitioner-Appellant, vs. THE SECRETARY OF PUBLIC WORKS AND COMMUNICATIONS, ET AL., Respondents-Appellees.