You are on page 1of 4

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.

You might also like